It depends upon what you mean by ‘non-technical’ and what you mean by ‘Linux’.
Approximately half of non-technical users already use Linux in the form of Android, but because Android locks down its internals & has a frontend distinct from the ones we are used to, it doesn’t produce an eternal september situation. In fact, Android users don’t generally know they’re using Linux in the first place (and a lot of them don’t know they’re using Android).
A larger proportion of non-technical users running Ubuntu know that they’re running Linux (though certainly not all). Ubuntu is explicitly aimed at non-technical users (as Lindows, Mandrake, Suse, and Red Hat used to be), and its support community is designed around the needs of nontechnical users. While this makes it harder to get sensible answers to the kinds of questions one must be fairly technical to ask, technical users either deal with it (solving the problems on their own without help from the community) or switch to another distro. Adding extremely non-technical people (the type who don’t know what a right-click is) to the user base of Ubuntu doesn’t substantially change the makeup of its community.
Other distros are explicitly aimed at more technical users, and they have gatekeeping mechanisms in place. There’s no technical reason why Arch can’t have an installer on the liveCD — they have decided to force prospective users to retype the installer source from the manual in order to ensure that most Arch users are at least capable of retyping shell one-liners (and this seems to be a trick they’ve taken from Gentoo). This doesn’t mean that using either Arch or Gentoo is harder than using Ubuntu — in fact, Arch is a pretty conventional binary distro, having a lot more in common with something like Slackware than with Gentoo. Somebody who isn’t capable of retyping code can nevertheless use an Arch system somebody else set up. (And certainly, the Arch userbase isn’t particularly technical: most Arch users have no idea what the code they typed in during installation actually means.) But, they’ve introduced this gatekeeping system because they aren’t capable of handling the documentation or moderation load that Ubuntu gets, & expecting people to be able to follow simple instructions reliably cuts down a lot of the effort of troubleshooting.
On the other side of the spectrum is a distro like Lunar, where there are few maintainers & almost all maintenance is the responsibility of the user. Users are expected to write their own packages, and make their own source-level changes to third party packages. Lunar doesn’t lack an installer the way Arch does, because it doesn’t really need to gatekeep: relatively few people even know it exists. A certain amount of effort is necessary to get X up and running. If ten totally non-technical users started trying to use it at the same time, they would dominate the forum & mailing list in terms of discussion volume. If a hundred non-technical users switched, they would outnumber not just official maintainers but the entire established user base.
We can’t pretend that supporting non-technical users is cost-free. It’s a valuable thing to do, but it requires different skills than supporting technical users, & non-technical users vastly outnumber technical users so there’s a problem of scale that small projects can’t handle.
Luckily, there is no such thing as “the linux community”: every distro has its own community, and there’s relatively little overlap; meanwhile, every application has its own community, and these communities mostly only overlap with the communities around major distros. So, individual communities can support different demographics.