奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:3 g# t. y; p4 ]1 O- N

* P4 o& L% R1 t8 [5 Ragree,, t9 N: q: j% l) D
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
8 h  z. j& o4 I3 i. ^' r* n但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
) ^' Q4 }$ W+ @期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 V3 S% ]+ K2 L9 |
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
6 B. x, n2 U+ E. h& A7 C已經睇左幾期,性質傾向於性教育,同某報既果d嫖妓指南,差天共地- N+ ]2 k8 Q9 {7 V& P
搞成咁,都係兩個原因,第一係香港人係性方面真係好保守,探討下都唔得,第二係欺善怕惡,見係學生就恰你

chicken

Read the student post and find that it's not as evil as described by the media.
  s% t3 S6 ?4 j9 c- ^# GJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
* t8 E5 e8 V5 t) @& ?# P% h% K有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 9 T: v+ a' Q% T# Y/ h: S6 \
& v; B7 `" B0 s/ w! c
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
' C: w# H6 X7 y% P7 s# B. o! x. e$ S' p2 L3 f2 o* l
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

: n6 S4 ~& H0 q8 O

$ S' e/ H- n6 R7 N, \& J絕對支持啦' f0 @" [- R9 C8 _6 J

6 A/ b, _9 F" N: n  C有錯就認,打就企定/ g6 r9 d7 A6 c# M/ N- g

# j" ~* N$ b8 M, y" }: F" J% m) R無錯當然要撐到底- I! v- M8 N2 ^# A: B6 ?7 h

' Z6 B& a. H5 l3 W; \2 m4 j但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
' R8 D& e+ p. e6 d$ H5 d/ h2 W- g, b, K) r3 T1 H
在發佈一份公眾讀物時,內容應該注意下,唔同私人交談,你講咩都得
. k* m# s% M( Y* y/ A) _% U* L) b6 `3 J
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
% V- a' O# b- U  s5 H7 c2 x. n; F; _. E: [* e' |
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
% g' K; X6 ]' T8 n3 _/ Z
! p/ N( @8 L. h" o唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?7 b# }1 s* d  K$ |8 i3 h
! j# V  t) n# `* R" A% ]( Y
我唔認為lor
  [( d( s- }- d3 H- i; V9 G: J3 H% g7 g' t5 i4 F3 v
唔係話要整死佢地, F( i  n5 U# U$ r
$ m- M9 _+ Z3 _+ J8 a4 V1 F
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
4 S! f/ U5 z7 E& }3 }
* I: W3 }: w3 G& A; H我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大* {! V% p1 {4 g6 y/ N/ v3 X# Q  H

# z3 v! B( I" T0 ]6 \有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
' c8 @5 i, h' }& |+ |$ R
1 s. ~1 U6 L  \3 Q% v. G唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由, T. ]2 c- X+ Z+ Z  L
  r; l; H3 b& z
大家都知偷錢搶錢係唔唔法,唔通咁又話政府防礙你搵錢?

浪子

睇完, 真係冇野好講, 咁所有中小學性教育書籍都可以列做不雅

hackenli

一日一金句$ a9 d; R, O8 [: b  R+ ?! T4 i
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非") A% t4 w, s' I3 [  g$ ~0 `& \: }

+ K. [( l1 m6 {; G* B# w: D: N我們的大學生
9 E$ M" j: k& r$ Q3 M
* N- C; E" v& w6 L, U' v
" r. u. ^2 c! Q3 g* ~! ^% J2 t# m$ g+ n- M1 ~

3 b- d5 R. t( a

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
; b4 Q$ z3 j' Y
8 h5 _- q: y9 a8 r) N
6 ?3 I* L  A, h0 K有見地 !!!( G& B/ h& D8 s* m
現今大學生部份以為...

vv1668vv

反映大學生對法律認知不足。自以為是

支持者

http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html7 g9 k: M0 X" [1 {

, Z/ ?+ P% a8 l: V3 O8 b- E' M- {8 f$ y/ wI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
  B9 Z+ X: [6 I+ B* v, `9 II never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
- e+ Y3 Q2 d% C4 c4 GI pretty sad that about the University official.
4 d  D" M) o; y! bIt's them making the stuff worse.

bigfish

我覺得份報刊以市井中文刊出就顯得不雅, 如果轉用華麗英文刊登就乜事都冇 la
' b  T' ^9 s9 b  z, Q5 I' b7 ^$ ~' S# }3 F
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

mailcool7

有錯就認,打就企定

155220

Originally posted by bigfish at 2007-5-15 17:24:
/ u7 U( ]8 Y( \- u我覺得份報刊以市井中文刊出就顯得不雅, 如果轉用華麗英文刊登就乜事都冇 la
" m' X2 o. b4 k  r4 Y+ r3 @
8 P) o9 E6 l9 O[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

) @! V: A9 G- }
$ a/ d, o" }. R+ z
兩者有何分別?
" t; C( p8 B! Q5 M4 M* b* E7 U; |中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?