Under the concept of Utilitarianism, the basic maxim is to "maximize the overall good." This is even the case if the law contradicts or impedes the pursuit for the "overall good." In fact, it is difficult to quantify the consequences of utilitarianism. What if, for example, you saw a family starving on the side of the road. You had no money, but saw a grocery store a 1/2 mile up the road. You went to the store, stole a loaf of bread and returned to feed the family. Was the greater good satisfied even though you broke the law and stole food? Was the concept of utilitarianism met? Should we even consider breaking the law to satisfy some other ethical theory?
What if we believe in it more than in keeping the rules?
In 750 words, please address.