Deontologists such as Thomas Nagel say Consequentialism permits actions that aim at evil, which is why it is a false theory.

This could be broken as follows:
Premise #1: If a (moral) Theory permits actions that aim at evil then it is wrong.
Premise #2: Consequentialism permits actions that aim at evil.
Conclusion: Consequentialism is wrong.

What would be a the most persuasive counter argument?

Topics: evil, philosophy, morality, ethics, goodness, denotology, consequentalism