Assignment:
If I were a surgeon and I had the opportunity to save five lives of terminally ill patients, by killing one healthy human I would refuse. For one, killing someone to save another is, in my opinion, is morally wrong. Second, what makes those five people so special, to deserve a healthy human's life by intentionally killing someone? Even if it's just one. Not that special. I feel as though the question pressures you into a 5 for 1 deal, like it's a transaction. Third, do I have to then choose who must die? I'm not God and do not wish to play God, so I would simply refuse. Can killing the "healthy person" mean sacrificing oneself? There are too many things to consider. I would simply just refuse.
In this particular situation I would want my judge at my trial to be act-utilitarian, because I want my ruling and sentencing to be based off of my actions, not rule utilitarian. As we all may have experienced, not everyone agrees with the rules or think specific types of rules should even be enforced. I would want to be judged based off of my actions, which I feel to most ethical standards are right.
Would like a short personal response to this?