Ethics Question

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Offering favoritism for those willing to pay is corruption. It shifts the burden of war and the risk of death from the wealthy to the poor.

It's easy to not consider this as immoral, since it appears to help some people directly while not directly harming anyone. But for every rich person you unfairly protect, a poor person or person without connections is forced to take their place. In effect, your influence is sending that person to war, even if you don't who they are.

[/ QUOTE ]
It can't be that simple. If you don't charge at all then your objection fails and theoretically you could charge in a way that means you make the same decisions as if you didn't charge.

So lets suppose its ethically okay if you don't charge, you make the decisions on compassionate grounds and then charge an amount (possibly zero) that each is easily able to afford.

Still a real toughie imo.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]How much does the justness of the war matter? Suppose it's generally considered to be a just war, and almost everyone that gets drafted given the choice to back out would choose to go and fight. Very few people want out.

What if it's generally considered to by an unjust war, and almost everyone wants out.