system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: If someone can legally enlist in the military, they should be able to legally sign themselves up for potentially inhumane and unethical scientific experiments.

I'll preface my view by stating that an unwilling subject should never have to undergo torture of any kind. This isn't a political observation about any country's foreign affairs. If I can willingly enlist into the military and risk my life for the sake of my country, I should be able to risk my life in a scientific and socially productive manner.

That being said I think there is still a lot to be learned about humanity in many different aspects of life. Humans have performed countless unethical science experiments in philosophy, psychology, biology, and chemistry on each other since recorded history. 

I think its fair to say some of the experiments we now view as unethical, early mental health treatment for example, was only done to compound a preexisting prejudice. Anyone with an education can see whats wrong with experimenting in LGBT+ conversion therapies and truly destructive, harmful fields.

To sum it all up, dying in consensual unethical experiment has much more potential to do good than dying fighting someone else's war.
gpt
While we might agree that the post-WW2 use of US military force has been.... ethically questionable, the fact that sovereign states *need* a military is pretty well established.  Indeed, the ability to defend one's territory from invasion is among the major requirements for asserting sovereignty.  

Ok -- so countries need militaries and militaries need troops.  Put another way, our society broadly understands that having people in uniform is a necessary evil but that allowing kids to participate in that institution is an unnecessary one.  Consequently, kids aren't allowed to serve in the military.  

What you're doing is saying that we allow people to participate in military service which is dangerous and (sometimes) unethical and problematic -- **evil**, if you will -- so why don't we allow them to participate in other self-destructive things which are also ethically questionable, dangerous, and, not to put too fine a point on it, **evil**?

And the answer is: those other evils aren't necessary evils.  

We've determined that we, as a society, are going to get by perfectly fine without encouraging scientists to engage in depraved exploitation of human subjects.  We don't need to facilitate that for our society to go on existing and so there's no situation in which we need to make an exception to the more general rule of "profiting by paying people to engage in self harm is wrong" rule.