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

Prostitution ““People who agree with this principle also tend to favor legalization of drugs because the only person harmed, if anyone is harmed, is one's self.” This is just blatantly not true, whereas usually the person partaking in drugs is the most affected, people that partake in drugs have a large impact in society. Alas, this is not the point of the debate. Here are statistics on just one drug, albeit a legal one but the most dangerous. (1) “It's generally regarded as wrong to hurt others, and I think I can say with fair confidence that this does not hurt others.” 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. The ends do not justify the means. Likewise in prostitution, what is the motivation for being a prostitute, greed, lust, boredom? There is no gain for society, there is no gain for self except for money, sex and pleasure (We are not debating the legality of prostituting just whether it is ethical). “The body is not sacrosanct, and neither should the act of sex be. It is a fact of life, one which similar animals perform indiscriminately.” Animals kill indiscriminately as well. “They are not inept children incapable of making a conscious decision on their own, but consenting adults agreeing to a mutually beneficial trade.” I am seeing this theme a lot, just because two people consent to something does not make it ethical (that’s a political and legal issue). 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. Soldiers “Soldiers, on the other hand, have provided much hurt to others. I'm aware that many are 'just following orders.' Regardless, they follow the orders assigned to them, which includes killing enemy combatants. Killing enemy combatants is amoral, as no man deserves to die.” Yes, soldiers cause a lot of pain and death. Just because war is brutal does not discredit whether or not is unethical. 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. 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. “This might seem to contradict my claim at first glance, but I would argue the rate would go down substantially if it were legalized and age restricted” This is a moot point as we are debating ethics not legality. “Without any soldiers, wars could no longer continue.” “Within a minute we could have world peace, but we do not as of yet.” "What if they gave a war and nobody came? Why, then, the war would come to you! He who stays home when the fight begins and lets another fight for his cause should take care: He who does not take part in the battle will share in the defeat. Even avoiding battle will not avoid battle. Since not to fight for your own cause really means fighting on behalf of your enemy's cause." - Bertolt Brecht Sources: (1): http://www.centurycouncil.org...