Absolutely. This just means less resources are required, not no resources at all.
Would you argue for stopping funding for rare diseases affecting only a small population? If you were to base funding solely on utilitarianism, you would.
I never said any of that. Just pointing out men in gay relationships are more vulnerable because men in general are more likely to become physically violent in cases of domestic abuse.
Absolutely. This just means less resources are required, not no resources at all.
Would you argue for stopping funding for rare diseases affecting only a small population? If you were to base funding solely on utilitarianism, you would.
I never said any of that. Just pointing out men in gay relationships are more vulnerable because men in general are more likely to become physically violent in cases of domestic abuse.