Reply #3: I remember the "killing one person to save five" question

[Chulanowa]

In the case of the trolley, it was generally decided that diverting the track is morally acceptable if it kills one person instead of five, but that throwing a person in front of it to stop it is worse than letting it continue into those five. The consensus seems to be that actively causing the death of someone is immoral no matter the reasons for doing so, while engaging in an act that results in death as a secondary effect is morally acceptable if done for a greater reason - saving five people for instance.

Interestingly if I recall correctly, it didn't matter much what the makeup of any of the groups was, it ended up the same - save the five by killing one, so long as you are not directly causing that one's death.