I love it! Thanks, Gavin. This could indeed get interesting.

I did my papers in two grad courses in ethics on Ethics in IT and Ethics
for IT Professionals. One of the more helpful things I read (if for no
other reason than it helped meet the pages read requirement) was a
standard text by Deborah Johnson entitled simply Computer Ethics (insert
inanimate computer joke here). In one section, she asks, 'Are Computer
professionals "professionals"?'  Here is part of her answer:

"...there is no hard and fast definition... The following is a list of
characteristics often associated with professions in this special sense
of the term.
1.  Professions require mastery of an esoteric body of knowledge,
usually acquired through higher education. Only members of the
profession possess this knowledge and it is this that justifies the next
characteristic.
2.  Members of professions typically have a good deal of autonomy in
their work (as compared to other occupations in which one simply takes
orders).
3.  Professions usually have a professional organization (recognized by
state government) that controls admission to the profession and sets
standards for practice.
4.  Professions fulfill an important social function or are committed to
a social good (such as health, in the case of medicine).

Other characteristics sometimes associated with professions include that
the profession has a division between those who are practitioners and
those who do research (continually improving on the esoteric body of
knowledge), members  of professions are bound by a code of professional
conduct or ethics, and members are seen as making a life commitment to
the field of their profession. These characteristics are thought to
justify the higher salaries usually associated with these special
professions. "...

She then concludes "Hence, it seems reasonable to conclude that
computing does not fit the classic paradigm", which I find hard to
reconcile with her statement that "there is no hard and fast
definition", then continues, perhaps appropriately, by stating that this
question is "not so important as is identifying characteristics of the
profession and of practice". This ambiguity leaves plenty of wiggle room
for one to come away with an affirmative or negative view. She also
talks about the social prestige associated with the archetypal
professions of medicine and law, but in my experience, being a "software
engineer" or developer does carry some level of prestige. I for one am
very grateful that there is no state government involvement in the
standards to which I work.