If we were to abolish all ethics, humanity will be able to answer many scientific things about the human body (And possibly augment it) that would have taken decades and possibly centuries to answer.
The advances in scientific and medical technology would be of greater benefit, disproportionate to the suffering caused.
This argument has the same total count for each premise type (however, but and because).
This assumes all people have an inherent need to simplify and organize everything. Some people like to live in chaos.
You can prevent three people from dying if you kill one yourself. This would be the morally correct choice to make
Everybody has different morals. Morals are based on personal experience/preception. Someone whos morals state that people deserve to die, choosing to kill 3 over 1 would be the morally right choice to make -for that person- The premise is subjective. Instead of moral, it should be ethic.
Nuclear armed countries are immune to total destruction by war.
if the country has 2nd strike capability, the power to deploy nukes is in the hands of few and their motivation to win ignores the value of the country itself over retaliation the attacking country will be destroyed.