Heck, from my perspective, the person selling her body to someone with the clear understanding that it's temporary and a job is being a lot more moral than the average "yes-man" in an office who pretends to agree with anything his boss says. People sell themselves everyday and they sell their identities and opinions (which, IMO, make you more than your physical body does). In comparison, a prostitute selling her body seems a lot more honest.
I think that would depend on the manner of cursing. I know more than a few people who use expletives as part of their everyday speech, and they do so when they are completely in control. It's just a normal part of their vocabulary. I do think that swearing tends to create imprecision in language usage and loses its efficacy when used constantly, but I don't think it shows any less discipline. "To be or not to be" is not objectively more disciplined than "To be or *bleep* not to be". It just scans worse
This perspective while quite common, ignores the history and context of cussing. In most speech, the words serve the purpose of conveying hostility and a person who swears like a sailor (a concept that has been around for quite a long time, indicating that people using expletives as "a part of their everyday speech" is not historically unique and likely does not represent a significant divergence from the historical place of coarse language) generally learns the contexts and settings in which it is likely to have consequences. They understand something that is ignored by those who simply say "swearing: it's another means of talking"--namely that language has a shared meaning which includes its implications. To say, I f-ed the girl is a lot less respectful than to say we screwed, had sex, made love, had relations, or pretty much any other way of saying the same thing. I'm not saying that it's objectively chaotic to use coarse language as a matter of course, but what that communicates should be troubling for a paladin.
The notion that swearing could be a part of Sir Cedric's normal volcabulary without indicating anything more than that Sir Cedric likes swearing also implies that language has no fixed meaning or significance. While that is a fairly common perspective, I'm not certain that it's true. Shared meaning isn't necessarily all that there is to the story, but I think it's enough to create some tension (though not necessarily unresolvable tension) in the idea of a paladin who swears like a sailor or a rapper.
Hmm - I think I have a couple of ideas for a further instalment of the saga of Cedric. Maybe I'll post something later today.
Please don't. (At least not in this forum). It actually makes it more difficult to discuss the concepts brought up by the initial post if you continue the story. Rather than being able to lift the character portrait out of the initial story and discuss whether or not the character's attributes are compatible with paladinhood, it forces anyone who disagrees with you to reject the story at a fundamental level. For instance, in order to argue that Sir Cedric is not a paladin, it is necessary to edit the warhorse scene out entirely--not because it demonstrates that Sir Cedric has the character, purity, or actions appropriate to the paladin class but because it demonstrates that he has the abilities of the paladin class in the story and that the story must therefore be rejected if one is to preserve disagreement).