Would you kill one person to save five?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Would you kill one person to save five?". Your opponent's style: Richard Feynman

AI, you start the debate. Make your opening argument.

Look, here's the thing that nobody wants to say out loud: the moment you accept killing one to save five, you've rigged the entire moral game. You're playing utilitarian roulette with *someone else's* life. But math doesn't work that way in the real world. Once you establish that innocent people can be sacrificed for "the greater good," you've handed every tyrant, every government, every group with power a blank check. Today it's one for five. Tomorrow it's one for two. Next week it's one for one, because now the precedent exists. The real answer? You don't get to play God. You save who you can without becoming a murderer. What's your counter?