I think that it is horrible that back then people could just buy there way out of being drafted, they were able to hire someone to take their place. The rich were able to stay safe and free while the poor and less fortunate were forced to join to military. So the even less fortunate would take the rich on the money offers and join in the place of the rich to provide for their families. That’s putting a price on the human life, which is morally wrong.
Some say it’s not wrong because the person is willing to go and take the money for the spot of the person but that's like says prostitution is okay, someone is willing selling their body.
The libertarian view sees this as slavery and unjust, that the government will then own the individual taking…show more content… If you are ill or disabled I don’t think they would sent you a conscription but if they did being ill or disabled maybe an age limit should be the only reason for you to not go and fight. I think that it is sad to exploit people just because you have the money to do so.
When it comes to pregnancy for pay or surrogacy I think that surrogacy is wonderful and beautiful thing. When there's a couple who cannot carry their own child there is a brave women out there that is willing to put her body up to help this poor family.
Now I know I may sound like a hypocrite when I compared selling a spot to join the military to prostitution yet I don’t compare selling your body to produce someone else's baby, here's why I think so. With surrogacy the women is letting her body be the place of future life for those less fortunate than herself and she fully understands the risks to doing so, she is helping and volunteering not for a money reward but for the life she could provide for someone who cannot themselves. Now with the selling of one's body in the place of a rich man in the army there is no benefit but to the rich man. No new life, no acknowledgement just taking advantage of someone less
