Inflammatory Rhetoric

To the Editor:

I normally prefer to ignore responses to my letters, but Ms. Rodibaugh’s latest reply demands clarification. It doubles down on the same flawed logic and theological projection that obscured the facts in her original letter. She claims there was “no misrepresentation,” yet continues to assert that Robin Westman was a teenager and that gender identity... not ideology, not access to firearms... was the root cause of the shooting. Both claims are demonstrably false. Period.

Westman was 23. It is false that Ms. Rodibaugh claimed he was a teenager. That is a misrepresentation by definition. His attack was premeditated, ideologically motivated, and executed with legally purchased firearms. The shooter’s own writings emphasized notoriety and anti-government rage, not confusion over gender. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara stated clearly: “This was about terror, trauma, and carnage.”

Ms. Rodibaugh’s assertion that “transgenderism is a pathology of identity” is not supported by any credible medical or psychological body. I challenge her to provide such evidence if she has it. The American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the World Health Organization all recognize gender dysphoria as a legitimate clinical condition, not a criminal ideology. Her claim that gender-affirming care is a “Ponzi scheme” is inflammatory rhetoric, not evidence. In the starkest terms, Ms. Rodibaugh’s stance is pure opinion, and it lacks factual support. Again, a misrepresentation of facts.

She accuses others of ignoring personal agency while simultaneously denying Westman’s capacity for it. That contradiction is the core failure of her argument. If Westman was responsible for illegally using lethal weapons, as she admits, then his identity is not the cause. His actions are. That’s the fundamental hypocrisy of her contention.

Finally, Ms. Rodibaugh asks whether my “partisan noise” offers comfort or leadership. Comfort is not the goal. Truth is. Leadership begins with accountability, not deflection. And honoring victims starts with refusing to scapegoat the marginalized. That’s basic humanity, not partisanship.

It is acceptable to disagree with Mr. Westman’s gender identity and feel that society should not accept transgenderism, but those are her opinions. They do not equate to the facts of this case.

Let’s keep the conversation grounded in facts, not more theology masquerading as criminology.

Eric Green La Grange