To the editor:

Based on the 11/16/21 “Reality and Morality” letter to the editor, Mr. Thom appears to be confused by the difference between a “legal” and a “moral” argument. Legal arguments are based on laws/statutes, whereas moral arguments are based on an individual’s belief system. Legal arguments are objective; moral arguments are subjective. Although Mr. Thom claims to base his positions on reason and law, after being presented with objective legal facts highlighting the falsehoods found in his previous statements/letters, Mr. Thom now appears to be aiming to shift the conversation into more subjective arguments, citing perceived “moral complexities” in what is a very basic issue legally speaking.

Mr. Thom attempts to claim that the use of the term “intentional” in the state anti-bullying statute refers to a student’s underlying motives when choosing to misgender an LGBTQ peer; in reality this terminology is referring to a student’s purposeful, deliberate (intentional) choice of action. A student “accidentally” misgendering a peer would not qualify as bullying under the statute; however if the student has been corrected yet continues to “intentionally” misgender a peer it would then qualify as bullying. There are many different reasons behind why a student may choose to engage in bullying behaviors. A student’s “moral complexities,” or the motivation behind their choices, is not relevant to whether or not his/her/their behavior is identified as bullying; what is relevant is the student’s actions.

Contrary to Mr. Thom’s assertion, I presented no moral argument in my 11/13/21 letter; I simply stated what kindness and respect looks like in my opinion. The remainder of said letter consisted of factual statements attempting to assist Mr. Thom in his apparent lack of understanding regarding state statutes and LGBTQ student rights in the public school setting. These legal rights are protected by law and are not something that are up for debate. I am not here to argue with Mr. Thom about his morals or values; he is entitled to his freedom of speech, which he passionately utilizes as much as possible. Freedom of speech is a protected right, but we must remember that freedom of speech does not also guarantee freedom from consequences for what one chooses to speak. In a public school setting, choosing to misgender a peer qualifies as bullying and has consequences.

Casey McMullen

New Ulm