Letter: Prostitution can have many definitions

Sunday, Sept. 16, 2007 | 1:27 a.m.

The letter from George Flint, executive director of the Nevada Brothel Owners Association, in the Las Vegas Sun makes a quasi-convincing argument for the "institution" of legal brothels in Nevada. ("The real scoop on legal brothels," Sept. 13)

First of all, I believe that it's relevant to define the brothel itself. According to the most accepted definitions of a brothel (from the Middle English), it is (as a noun) a worthless fellow or prostitute, cross referenced to bordello, a building in which prostitutes are available.

In itself, prostitute is defined - in one of its incarnations - as 1: "a person who deliberately debases his or her talents (as for money)" and 2: "to devote to corrupt f or unworthy purposes: debase (one's talents) . "

It seems to me that this definition of prostitution could easily be extended in an umbrella-like manner to cover the U.S. Congress and, here at home, the Nevada Legislature, Las Vegas City Council and Clark County Commission.

They, like the legal brothel inhabitants, obtain the best medical care that Nevada taxpayers can provide. The major downside in legal brothels is that none of them obtain the most lucrative retirement and health care plans that the taxpayer-financed "public servants" receive.

No, legal brothels are far more healthy environments than the (relatively) open prostitution that exists in any populated metropolitan area. There are probably as many prostitutes in the New York City area as there are people in Clark County. The Oldest Profession just gets bigger; the Second Oldest Profession (Politics) gets both bigger and worse.

Lou Garner, Las Vegas