[Objective] This study aims to analyze individual agency within a community, focusing on integrity as discussed by Williams and Railton. It explores Williams' integrity threat argument, Railton's counter-arguments, and their practical relevance in everyday challenges, addressing the moral dilemma of sacrificing some for the greater good. [Contents] This paper examines the community-individual agency relationship within a utilitarian framework, specifically Williams' integrity threat argument and Railton's sophisticated consequentialism counter. Starting with Williams' argument, it explores Railton's counterarguments categorized as personal, non-personal, and social. We assess Railton's proposed alternatives, shedding light on issues within Williams' argument, including integrity limits, the passive responsibility argument, and other pertinent problems. [Conclusions] This study reveals potential conflicts within communities and explores reconciling collective well-being with individual interests in utilitarianism. It suggests that open consultation should determine actions when individual integrity is threatened. However, in severe peril, objective utilitarianism may offer a pragmatic solution while nurturing ethical consideration for one's integrity and the well-being of others.