Replies

Aside from the point I've made repeatedly to you - & which you've repeatedly ignored - with respect to 'local' stories becoming 'national' ones far more readily up here because we have less than 1/10 of America's population base ...

... has it occurred to you that the wholes issue of deviant, oddball, communist, etc, etc, etc, elected officials has little or nothing to do with national factors?

Isn't it far more likely that it's largely an inner-urban versus suburban/rural phenomena ???

And, beyond that, one that reflects local demographics?

As example, Canada has far fewer black open racists in public life.
Why? Because we don't have as many concentrated pockets of bad attitude, descendants of slaves to elect them.

This doesn't mean either country is better or worse than the other.
No, it's just a fact of life - plain & simple.

San Francisco likely has more elected open homosexuals than Toronto which is much larger by population.
Does this prove anything as to the entirety of either the U.S. or Canada?
Not in my book but, you tell me?

"has it occurred to you that the wholes issue of deviant, oddball, communist, etc, etc, etc, elected officials has little or nothing to do with national factors?"

Yes, clearly the differences are national factors that are somehow built into the attitudes of a nation's values and its will. It is also clear that Canada and the US are much more different than what the casual observer like myself might think. For example, why is there not a much more vicious attack of gays by Canadian FReepers? Instead, for the most part, I get a reasonably measured response that consistently affirms autonomy and respect for the individual gay person. Now a whole bunch of people are going to say that is nice but, it is also a significant compromise on a realistic moral agenda. Does no one fear that you at risk, at least metaphorically, of turning into a pillar of salt for your condoning aberrant behavior?

I went back and reread your post and my response (see #70 above) and I realized your key point deserved a better response. On reflection I think you are probably right. Local demographics would be the significant factor exactly as you suggest in terms of behaviors and choices. So, the local factor can explain the unique set of circumstances that makes a San Francisco happen. For example, one position might argue that local conditions have worked to create a gay magnet. San Francisco and California welcomes gays while most American cities and states tend to push them away. So, one extreme argument might be that a sodomite mecca has been created through repulsion and attraction. So, on your key point I will concede your argument.