Using a Utilitarianism approach, which produces the greatest amount of pleasure, would mean that yes, there should be equal opportunity in a just society. With this approach each human has the same worth as all other humans. In a just society citizens work to build communities that contribute to the good of others. Although Utilitarianism is sought out to increase overall happiness, it does not account for who or what is done. Killing a criminal, say a thieve or a drug dealer, may make more people happy than not, but does that still make it alright? In situations like this, it is not a realizable ideal. Also it considers all persons as equal and does not put into play special relationships. Should a mother have to save the lives of a group of people before she saves her own children because this would produce the most happiness?
In John Stuart Mills concept, he distinguishes different kinds of pleasures. For him it is unsatisfying to think that all pleasures are equal, as Jeremy Bentham did. He said that there are higher pleasures that are better than other ones. He also distinguished between different ways in which doing good is approved. He said that there are motives that come from either outside a person or from the inside of them and that internal motives produce the most good. The disadvantages of applying this is that, how do you measure ones pleasure? One persons maximum may not equal another persons maximum.