>> I cant believe people reacted so emotionally to my comment when i wasnt even passing a value judgment and just stating a fact. This is why I'm so emotional.

>> I cant believe people reacted so emotionally to my comment when i wasnt even passing a value judgment and just stating a fact. This is why I'm so emotional. This isn't a fact. This is an assumption, and a really weird one at best. Here's what we have for facts: About 5% of the US population identify as Vegetarian or vegan. "Most" vegetarians are liberal. Liberals are not evenly distributed among the general population. Putting this together, your assumption is highly flawed at best. There's no logical reason we can't assume that while liberals aren't equally distributed, vegetarians are. Being a vegetarian means you're likely inclined to be liberal, it's a correlation not causation. There's nothing I've seen that shows anything about expected distribution of vegetarians based on where they live. The best thing anyone has come up with is the thanksgiving gallup poll below. Also, your OG statement was that they aren't common outside of meto areas. This is so vague and meaningless. What's common? That 1/100 people are a vegetarian? That people know someone anecdotally that is a vegetarian? My point is that your asserting that you know that vegetarians are uncommon in the Rural US. I posit that it's impossible to know that. That's not to say you're wrong or not (I'm not claiming I know either) but that making a statement of that type is problematic in a fact based discussion.