Kant at the gas station.

Deanna, this is fascinating.  One, in the first case study you point out that Utilitarianism, what is good for the majority, does not justify doing unethical, evil, harmful, immoral things to minorities or individuals.  Amen.  Second, in your evaluation of the second case study you, in effect, restate Kant here.  Kant goes this way.  All humans have the capacity to reason, which is universal.  Therefore, he argues that any kind of double standard that denies this universality among humans is unethical.  If, for instance, I need to eat; other people need to eat.  So, as Kant would venture, we have a moral duty to feed the hungry, or we engage in a double standard.  Whenever a double standard exists, somebody is being victimized.  Tonight, for instance, my wife and I stopped to buy gas. She went inside the station.  Meanwhile, a young man approached this writer to ask for some money to buy food.  He got $10, enough to go to the hearby fast food place.  We just finished eating at a seaside, portside restaurant; our stomachs were full.  Your humble servant here cannot, could not say, oh, we eat, but you do not eat.  Yes, it was an expression of duty too.  Dr. Rux