It is Less Ethical to be a Soldier than a Prostitute.

"Is hurting others the only way to determine if something is unethical or not? Why not the motivation for doing an action? If a person was drowning in a lake and you knew this person to be filthy rich, what if you only saved them with hopes of a big reward instead of saving the person for savings sake? This would not be an ethical act, it would be selfish." No, harming others isn't the only way, I was just pointing out a front on which prostitution isn't immoral. The motivation in this case is money, not a particularly heroic motivation, but no different than the one which ties office workers to their cubicle. Money isn't a good or bad motivator, what you do with it is. As for the drowning lake example, doesn't the fact still remain that the drowning man is saved? What if someone found the cure for cancer, and said they did it not for the millions of people who die each year, but for the sake of science? Either way, I don't see prostitution as having an unethical motivation. "There is no gain for society, there is no gain for self except for money, sex and pleasure." The point being? Society can benefit, in a limited sense, with a lucrative industry and corresponding tax dollars. And it can fulfill a need because it has a customer base, otherwise it would go out of business. But many people have jobs that don't benefit society any more than being a job, and that isn't a bad thing. "Animals kill indiscriminately as well." I think its a bit of a stretch to equate killing with sex, but I see your point. However, animals kill to fulfill a need, hunger. They have sex to fulfill the need of survival. Prostitutes have sex to fulfill a need of money. Soldiers kill to protect the abstract ideal of the homeland, but are more often involved in attacking others. "For example let"s say you wanted to kill yourself and I said I would help. We both consented yet the act of killing for pre-termination is unethical and selfish. You take your own life"s worth over the collective emotions of everyone you know and disregard them." Is it unethical because it's selfish? I tend to equate selfishness with a positive connotation, and in this case I would disagree that the action is unethical (though its a separate issue). People have the right to kill themselves because they own their own body, their own life, and if it is carefully thought over I wouldn't call it unethical. Just a nonjudgmental weighing of the pros and cons to life. "From a societal standpoint war is necessary to stop other nations and groups from destroying your homeland, it must only be used as a last resort as it the most extreme mean to a favorable end, many tactics should be used prior like mediation." I would agree with you on that point. But what about when that does not occur, and your country goes to invade another, which seems to happen so much more often than "defense"? If every army simply defended themselves, there would be no wars. But they seem to keep popping up for some reason. When you say "defending the nation" I hear "eliminate threats" which can be viewed as a threat by another nation. And if you don't disobey orders when ordered into conflict, that is unjust to the innocent lives and hardships you perpetuate. Furthermore, I would say nations do not need a military to stop war, and rather that the threat an army poses makes it more likely. Just look at Switzerland and Costa Rica. The bigger a countries standing army is, the more likely that power is to be misused, since power corrupts. So by contributing to a standing army (many Founding Fathers argued against one) you are contributing to an increased likelihood of conflict. "On an individual level soldiers do not go into war with the idea of slaughtering innocents, soldiers go into war with the idea that they are protecting a nation and its inhabitants." Well of course they enter in with great ideals, but the fact remains that they do and have slaughtered innocents. And when it comes right down to it, most soldiers get pressured into killing anyway. I think soldiers have an adequate idea that this could happen when entering into the military, but they still join. "This is a moot point as we are debating ethics not legality." I wouldn't exactly say moot, since the point I was making is that being a soldier is more psychologically damaging to the self then prostitution, which I surmised would be true under legal prostitution. Sources: 1. http://en.wikipedia.org...