Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Argument

A hot commodity is a slave, one that desires the ability to sell themselves as an investment for the future. As of now the law states that selling your self is illegal. The idea of selling flesh for the work of others may seem as being un-ethical. However, a person selling themselves to better the life of someone else is more so a hero than a slave. The slave is more than just flesh, rather monetary value. The idea that the slave is being sold creates an exchange of money. The money made from the salves will enhance the economy thus creating more jobs. In return for the money the peoples that have sold themselves will be in assistance to people who have purchased them.
The idea that the selling of flesh seems un-ethical is not a mere possibility in this instance. Slaves are ones that are willing to risk their lives by assisting others immediate needs. In conclusion there are multiple layers to the positive attributes of slavery. It will create jobs, while assisting many people. There will be a large flow of money of which will be put back into the economy. Lastly, people who are willing themselves are steeping up and assisting those in need based upon a contract. Therefore based upon such principals of ethics, money and assistance it is seen to be fit and ethical to sell yourself as a slave.

3 comments:

  1. Hey Derek,

    Do you believe there is a difference between a prostitute and a slave? I am not sure which one you are talking about here. I do agree with contractual agreement for paid company, but not with sex. THAT, my friend, shall remain free.

    What type of slave are you referring to throughout your argument?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the comment I am referring to a working slave, and yes I as well believe that sexual relations shall remain free.

    ReplyDelete
  3. History books tend to refer to the subject of your argument as "indentured servitude." At least in the context of colonial Britain.

    Slaves, on the other hand, were unwilling, unpaid labor.

    Indentured servitude isn't actually illegal to my knowledge, by that definition. Certain acts are illegal, though, between "master" (employer) and "servant" (employee); i.e. sexual favors, performing unlawful acts, etc.

    One notable exception to this rule is if the indentured servant (see: slave) is "hired" by the United States Government.

    ReplyDelete