Tea Parties, Glenn Beck protest Muslim Family Day at Six Flags Great America

djDaemon : So is 100,000 an upper bound for the size of groups I can discriminate against? What if this group is a subset of a much larger group? (i.e. tea party members are generally conservatives politically)

Snarkiness?

I won't attempt to answer for dj for the first part, but I think the snarkiness comment comes from:

Robotfactory: You need to ask Jeff your question, and pay better attention to the thread you respond to.

Right back at you! Try reading the whole page of the thread, at least.

Instead of just saying "It was in response to Jeff, I was being sarcastic".

Re: snarkiness... that ^.

I'm not saying there is some magic number, but rather suggesting that generalizations will have more or less accuracy (as it relates to being representative of the majority of the group) depending on the size of said group. And that differentiation will be magnified when looking at groups that have massive size differences.

Of course I was guiding him to the answer. I could have just called him stupid like he did me. :-)

I didn't call you stupid. I called your comment moronic and ignorant, and thereafter apologized if I had misunderstood its intent, and your snarkiness continued even after my apology.

"Holy moronic ignorance, Batman!"

I guess I took that the wrong way then.

So if Beck specifically talks about "radical Islam" and mentions how very small this group is, can he then generalize about them?

You're not really generalizing about radical Islam then. I mean, the radicals that go out and commit terrorism aren't the subjects of prejudice, BECAUSE they're the ones involved in the negative activity that gets attributed to the whole.

At that point you're stating facts. It's a fact that radical Islamists believe certain ways that cause others to go out and commit terroristic acts. But saying that Muslims are terrorists is generalizing because not all, and in fact it seems that the majority of Muslims aren't terrorists. Otherwise there would be 1.4 billion people committing acts of terror.

But even of the radical Islamists, very few of them actually commit the terrorist acts. Others can recruit, incite, raise money, etc. The leaders don't blow themselves up!

"But saying that Muslims are terrorists .." I don't believe Beck has ever said that. He always talks about radical Islam, and how they are a very small group. If this is the case, is he speaking facts?

You don't have to actually blow yourself up to be a Radical Islamist, you just have to support those that do. How is someone that supports, raises funds, and recruits someone to blow themself up any different than the person who pushes the button, other than one lives and one dies?

Supporting terrorism is still a problem. Saying negative things about radicals, based on actual facts about what the entire group's beliefs are, isn't generalizing. It isn't generalizing to say "Well, all Muslims believe in the teachings of Muhammad", because they do.

But in this instance, Beck doesn't think that Muslims (as a group) should have an Muslimcentric day at SFGAm. He doesn't think ANY Muslim should. For stupid reasons. And he isn't speaking in 'facts' about this, he's stating his opinion that it is some how wrong for Muslims to have a day at Six Flags in Chicago the day after the 9th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on the US, that just happened to be carried out by Radical Muslims.

Actually I think you're misrepresenting what Beck thinks. His issue is only with the date, which you state later. I understand you disagree with his opinion.

I read in this thread that there is a Muslim family day on 9-10 at one park, and 9-12 at another park. Why did the groups decide not to hold the days on 9-11? Were they sensitive to the date?

No I'm not misrepresenting what Beck thinks. His issue isn't only with the date, his issue is that Muslims are holding an event at a theme park on 9/12. The issue isn't only with the date. As you must have read in the entire thread, many of us feel that he is being silly.

I don't care if they held it on 9/11 or not. It's a Saturday. People will be at theme parks on saturday, and 8 year old kids that weren't even born when this terrible tragedy won't even know what it means to those of us that do.

The point is, Beck doesn't want them holding a Muslim event on 9/12. He obviously doesn't have a problem with the other events that aren't Muslim events being held around the country the day before, of, and after 9/11. So he has a problem specifically with Muslims holding an event on 9/12.

What is there to misunderstand? And why did I let myself get reinvolved in this stupid thread anywho?

The issue isn't with the date? So you are saying if the Muslims held their day on June 25 Beck would still be upset?

I don't believe that, do you?

So was the Muslim group being silly in not holding the day on 9-11?

The issue isn't ONLY the date, and you're trying to say it is. Beck's issue is that MUSLIMS are having an event on 9/12. He doesn't have any problem with any other organization having an even on that date, so why Muslims?

And as far as them having it on 9/11, I've stated, I don't care when they have it, 9/10, 9/12, 9/11. I don't have an opinion on what date they hold it. If they wanted to not have it on 9/11, so what? I don't care. And I really don't care that they have it on 9/12.

If a Church were having an even on 9/12, Beck wouldn't care, but because MUSLIMS are, he has an issue, so it isn't just about the date.

And besides, if it was held on June 25, then we wouldn't be discussing it here, because Beck and others wouldn't have some reason to try and turn it into some Muslim giving the Americans the finger issue. That's all they're doing. Let them have their day whenever they want, I don't care, and neither should anyone else. They're certainly not harming the U.S. by going to Six Flags and spending Money.

The date is the only issue Beck has with this event! Yes, the fact it is a Muslim event is what gives him issues with the date, nobody denies that!

It seems to me the Muslim groups organizing the day were sensitive to 9-11, so they held it on a different day. Beck is more sensitive in wishing it wasn't held close to 9-11. Why is the Muslim sensitivity ok, but Beck's not?

djDaemon said:
Then perhaps some Tea Party group should prepare such a video...

Yeah, they should. Maybe they're too stupid? ;)

The simple fact that the Tea Party movement only started now, and not sometime during the previous administration (when our government spent gads of money - which I understand as one of the TP's main concerns), doesn't do much to legitimize their "message".

And I'm sure there's just as many example of groups letting Obama slide on issues that Bush was taken to task for.

I just don't care enough about discrediting those groups every chance I get and trying to make them seem silly to go find the info. Maybe someone angrier and stupider than me will?

I generally don't have a problem with people who are angry and stupid...on either side. I just roll my eyes when haters call Obama a Nazi, just like I did when the other side called Bush a Nazi.

People have the right to be angry and stupid. I don't think we're angry and stupid enough sometimes. :)

Beck isn't being sensitive! He doesn't want them to have it! He doesn't want MUSLIMS to have an event that has nothing to do with 9/11 on 9/12. Why does he care? How does it affect him in any way? I don't know nor care why they aren't having the event on 9/11. Maybe they always have it on a Sunday. Maybe they didn't want to have it on 9/11 because the country will be focused on other things. Maybe they pulled the date out of a hat, I don't know, and I don't care, but the point that most people were making is that it doesn't matter. Them having it on the 12th isn't taking any of my rights away. It doesn't affect me. But trying to get them NOT to have it on that day is taking their rights away.

And aside from that, once again, I'm done. Bye.

Beck isn't being sensitive to the days on and around 9-11?? Ok, now I understand--you have never listened to Beck talk about 9-11.

So why do you care that Beck finds it in "poor taste" so close to 9-12? How does it affect you in any way? How does his expressing his opinion take rights away from you? He hasn't tried to ban it. Yet you rambled on and on how evil he is. For expressing he finds it in "poor taste."

Apparently the Muslim groups organizing the day thought 9-11 would be in "poor taste" so they held it another day.

"But trying to get them NOT to have it on that day is taking their rights away." Beck gave his opinion, nothing more. I assume the event is still on? So nobody's rights were taken away.

I, too, don't care when they hold the day. They have every right to hold it on 9-11, or any day they choose. And if all Beck does is say he finds it in "poor taste" I think we can find far more offensive comments just about everywhere.

People have the right to be angry and stupid.

I agree, and to be quite honest, I've yet to see any real Change from any politicion in the big seat, after it's been promised for the last 30 years of my life. "Second verse, same as the first..."

Beck isn't being sensitive to the days on and around 9-11?

Beck isn't being sensitive to the beliefs, rights, and opinions of Muslims. Mayhaps I should have made that clearer, but that was the obvious point.

So why do you care that Beck finds it in "poor taste" so close to 9-12? How does it affect you in any way? How does his expressing his opinion take rights away from you? He hasn't tried to ban it. Yet you rambled on and on how evil he is. For expressing he finds it in "poor taste."

I don't 'care' that he finds it in poor taste, I've commented on why he and others find it in poor taste because I don't understand why a tradition that was held before 9/11 is being upheld and this year it just happens to fall around that time, and these people want it to not happen. Just because Beck isn't necessarily trying very hard to stop it, he went on his show and denounced it, saying they shouldn't have it. He wants the rights of others taken away, even if he isn't activily trying to take it away. And I've not rambled on about how 'evil' Glenn Beck is. I just thing he's a biggot and an idiot.

Apparently the Muslim groups organizing the day thought 9-11 would be in "poor taste" so they held it another day.

They thought it was in poor taste to have it on 9/11 and so they moved it back a day. An event that was meant to coincide with the end of a religious activity. I don't think they should have felt they had to move it at all, as I don't think it was in poor taste, and they weren't wanting to have it on 9/11 because of the meaning of that day and it's relationship with their beliefs. Some people (not Beck that I've seen) in this thread and elsewhere feel that they're doing it out of spite, when they are not.

So nobody's rights were taken away.

Which doesn't dilute the fact that if it were up to Beck, they wouldn't have it on that day, thus he would like to see their rights to have it at any time taken away.

And if all Beck does is say he finds it in "poor taste" I think we can find far more offensive comments just about everywhere.

So I need to find somethign more offensive to be upset about, but Beck can be offended about a Muslim day at Six Flags in a City he doesn't live in, which won't affect him in any way, but not need to worry about finding something offensive?

I know I keep saying it, and one of these times I'll mean it, but I'm getting done with this back and forth of people taking up for extreme thinking on either side. Beck knew his following words about the militia park would be offensive, and he made sure they were said.

But what if an extremist religious group carried out an attack on another country that resulted in the death of thousands on December 24th? Nine years later, how many Christians that celebrate Christmas would put off celebrating it on the 25th if someone in the country thought it was in poor taste?

I tend to agree. If you don't want to be judged by the actions of the vocal minority, then be a vocal majority. If the Tea Baggers don't want to be judged by Palin and others, then the ones that aren't extremists need to speak a little louder.

Yet when I tried to be a vocal majority to explain what the ICNA stands for from the perspective of the majority moderate Muslim, there was no attempt to assist my efforts.

I'm not saying you're wrong abut the ICNA. I don't know nor care enough about them to have an opinion on their motives.

As an American Muslim, such responses are typical and very frustrating. I fail to understand how all good Americans, regardless of religious affiliation, could not care about a group that send money to people whose goal is to kill Americans. I fail to understand how good American's support groups like ICNA whose majority make-up follow Extreme Sharia principles. The very religious freedoms you grant to a group such as this is the very tool they use to undermine your freedoms. How many Americans care enough to know that Extreme Sharia principles do not allow for religious tolerance? You understand that there are many who will kill to defend Strict Sharia Law? They already have.

Do you understand that there are good Muslims' trying to stop this? In our country (not certain outside our borders) we are a majority. I do speak. Other moderate Muslim's speak. We can't get the American public to listen.

You seem more interested in Glen Beck's words and Tea Party politics. All of which could be righteous causes, but are certainly not matters of life and death. Keep ignoring, or refusing to educate yourself about groups like the ICNA at OUR own peril. Sept 11 happened because we ignored, or were afraid to speak up. Ten years later we repeat the pattern.

Whether you care or not, I'm certain than when the next 9/11 type attack occurs, if anybody even bothers to investigate, you will find some connections to ICNA funding if not active participation of their members.

That is the reality of the group Six Flags is hosting. They have the right to their event. We have a right to denounce it. Who will have the courage to denounce it?

Groups like ICNA flourish because good people stand by and do nothing. They are better funded and better protected than the vocal majority. They are wolves in sheep's clothing who publicly preach a political correct restraint. But their actions are extreme. But as the quote above demonstrates, most don't care.

I know our politics are divided. But those planes did not discriminate. All types of American's with differing skin colors and differing political believes were equally dead in the name of some bastardized adherence to Sharia Law.

And yet so many want to make this story about Glen Beck's opinions?

You're not a vocal majority, you're one person who comes in here with no prior posts as an annonomous poster posting things that seem rather self serving. You may be right, but I don't see any proof, and until I see proof, then I don't really have any reason to believe you, as you don't have any reputation at all here with 3 posts, let alone a reputation for posting proof.

You said earlier:

After 9/11 I was no longer comfortable associating with them.

Since 9/11 they have moderated their public image and speak moderate.

Why did you feel comfortable up until 9/11? They didn't take responsibility of the attacks. And if they're moderate post 9/11, what made you feel uncomfortable?

But their actions are extreme. But as the quote above demonstrates, most don't care.

Please provide proof of their extreme actions and I'll care. Your word and telling someone to Google them isn't proof. Otherwise I'd be sitting at home making $9000 a day playing on the computer.

But those planes did not discriminate.

No, they didn't, so then why is Glenn Beck?

And yet so many want to make this story about Glen Beck's opinions?

Um, because that's what the title of the story was about?