Yes, phatomch is right.
Why can't people debate a point of view without attacking the other person? Attack their argument, attack their point of view - but don't attack them. It actually lessens the effectiveness of your debate. There's no need to bait people or resort to ad hominem attacks.
As for the OP, I'm a passionate Liverpool fan. I don't read the s*n, and detest it on many levels. But you cannot boycott the entire Murdoch empire if you like to watch any TV, in particular sport on TV. Kelvin MacKenzie was in charge at the s*n at the time, and still contributes for the paper. He is a vile individual in many ways and an ideal bedfellow for that rag. He appears on BBC radio from time to time, so does this mean you'll also boycott the BBC because of their association with him? I have issues with the supermarket's control and total domination of the retail market - but I still shop in supermarkets.
You don't want Gerrard to talk to the NOTW? What about talking to Sky reporters and presenters? What about when he appears as a guest in the studio of a Sky broadcast - do you protest at that? There was an outcry when Souness sold hs story to the s*n, especially as it was on the anniversary of Hillsborough. This is quite a different thing. I'm sure Gerrard is sensitive to the feelings of the families of the 96, after all, he's one of them.
whats this S*n business?
If you write the word Sun will Rupert Murdoch or Kelvin MacKenzie appear and take a shit in your cornflakes or something?
While i understand the feelings towards the Sun from the people of Liverpool, I always think that ridiculous things like this tend to devalue whatever genuine issues you might have.
P
LOL - it's a parody. It's suggesting the word is a swear word in the same way as you'll often see f**k used. It's not a religious fear of the word.
Hope you understand now. Not sure how it devalues any position.
D
Author