You and Obama are on a plane together. The plane’s engine fails; President Obama, for a reason unknown, doesn’t have a parachute, but you do. Do you give him your parachute and die, or do you keep your parachute and let him die? Why?

The clear problem here is not simply the decision of self-sacrifice, it asks the question of whether public officials’ lives are more valuable than the average citizen. Then of course the varying degrees of public officials are called into question also. Is the president less expendable than the vice president? Is he far less expendable than a congressman? Is he infinitely less expendable than a city councilman?

I feel that the answer is yes, simple as that. Yes President Obama should get the parachute instead of you, and not because he is somehow a better person than you, or even a good president necessarily. The major difference between his death and yours is that his death will affect an entire nation’s safety, and yours probably doesn’t. If the president were to die unexpectedly, the United States would be left in a potentially vulnerable state that could lead to the endangerment of all American citizens. When the tragedies of 9/11 occurred, there were several planes meant for several targets. And while the world trade center was the most tragic, most of the planes were directed towards public offices. Had the other planes succeeded as planned we may be in very different country.

One could say that the president is simply a human being, and one life does not count for more than another. To that I would have to disagree. I would say that, in our history presidential deaths (while in office) have proven to disrupt national safety. Ultimately I would not be happy with the action of handing over the parachute, but I would know that it was the right thing to do.