Would it be completely unreasonable to allow `fundrawtransaction` to use unsafe outputs?

I understand this means the resulting transaction may be invalidated whenever the unsafe output I'm relying one disappears (e.g. because the transaction that produced it was RBF-ed) but in my case that's ok, I'll react to that and re-publish the tree of child transactions accordingly.

But let me know if you think that's too much of a footgun for users, in that case I'll architect my solution differently.
UniValue entry(UniValue::VOBJ);
            if (involvesWatchonly || (wallet.IsMine(r.destination) & ISMINE_WATCH_ONLY)) {
                entry.pushKV("involvesWatchonly", true);
            }
            MaybePushAddress(entry, r.destination);
            if (wtx.IsCoinBase())
            {
                if (wtx.GetDepthInMainChain() < 1)
                    entry.pushKV("category", "orphan");
                else if (wtx.IsImmatureCoinBase())
                    entry.pushKV("category", "immature");
                else
                    entry.pushKV("category", "generate");
            }
            else
            {
                entry.pushKV("category", "receive");
            }
            entry.pushKV("amount", ValueFromAmount(r.amount));
            if (address_book_entry) {
                entry.pushKV("label", label);
            }
            entry.pushKV("vout", r.vout);
            if (fLong)
                WalletTxToJSON(wallet.chain(), wtx, entry);
            ret.push_back(entry);
        }
    }
}
static const std::vector<RPCResult> TransactionDescriptionString()