奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
; ]" F- K% J" d: A: ^
9 o  F3 c( }; d. u7 f0 f/ sagree,/ B, |6 }; `7 m" T# y- \
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
! |7 g# T% j2 B但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
' A9 {2 `) {2 ?) B0 G( s期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

! c; Z& H( C& |% m4 R/ mhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
4 V0 y" d, h6 U: t8 @; n. D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4 f) y) @" y- ?6 g
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.
, o. L9 ?9 B6 {: XJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:- }2 a0 j: h+ [3 G' B* j
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 1 O7 J  ^* |' y$ B+ z9 Z

7 u# w* e9 Z" Q# c, p, O( R5 G係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
0 T) T* |9 ~8 y% i* {. y
- e( @* d+ g, M* r7 \$ u! X為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

! W5 P; l5 ~9 t# S, ^& I5 {4 h

" S8 H% Y5 V8 s$ O4 C絕對支持啦. Y* ?3 d. Z( E+ K: \: g' p
! u6 T' x, Q- I  d& J; t8 t
有錯就認,打就企定3 m! J& i! `! o7 z5 y. A- N
2 T. i6 d( g4 h, m! Y
無錯當然要撐到底/ x5 ~, v( z8 S  f
) F7 v& q* f5 [: R
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩4 o& x) s% q* f. |5 ?7 N; |6 t

* O4 I2 ^9 N, ?$ `  N- a2 y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3 E: q* ~' [0 ^3 ^& }% i, r: m& w
+ k5 Z. s, L! l% O9 Z$ d
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
  T/ L; g* j: H. ?/ |4 R7 J) @
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
& \0 F5 V1 J/ S
, O) L. ]4 H1 d8 Q  J唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?# e' _$ H; _6 ~
/ h/ e  m7 B" Q3 e
我唔認為lor2 \. L! i- [* r7 K
. d1 V: n; ^8 y- |. @
唔係話要整死佢地
( @, i* i9 [9 W! C3 J* ?
* X* c+ Z  z- s8 t6 e1 q而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用9 d  w" _- J% Q% I; [+ a

( l* J# ^! y% Y& d6 J我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
6 ?: V8 f2 m; P+ H# w/ D5 S" X' H  W; Q3 o# K8 Y% Y2 |
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
2 o, g* {, j; b0 N1 k2 q3 V
* p. \9 G0 T' q) m+ w6 ~2 N唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由# N$ |1 y1 z4 b" @  {1 x

! }0 E1 @7 u9 Y8 y: J9 t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
* o# Q) q# Z7 \/ w. W/ D"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"3 w& ^9 i4 J$ k; ?; P. ^
7 @. @  q, ]+ u! @- d3 P
我們的大學生
& i) w2 Y6 J& m5 |
% h* \5 c- ~9 b6 s* {( \- _  g0 [% T2 i' o6 j
0 U! m2 B) s6 B$ E2 S
9 D& _, d. H' C6 Y2 T! p

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:' a, B' D4 @+ W& q4 W1 O. v
5 v; }7 d7 _% q
$ y* ]1 p! j' v" B. o4 r
有見地 !!!9 M  O& u- P8 k: Z( G! ?
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.html
! m# u' A0 O2 T- u7 A; [
8 c) N( R# s( q3 \I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 2 b: m3 n% o8 d$ ^+ t1 i; W
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 4 a! t& k# V5 p+ o
I pretty sad that about the University official.
# S1 ]1 |8 c$ C: F. jIt'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 la8 \1 N* k; _) L
. q9 [) F) M# H5 m! s+ C
[ 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:
# q8 Y) W8 J2 c* x: X, d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$ [- o6 F. x% D: f

: n+ }7 Z2 Q4 p5 I+ j0 D; l[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 [2 w9 @# W8 j9 N% Y( W+ o' I$ J; u% {' E2 m: p
兩者有何分別?
1 y! ~, [! o% S8 {4 |2 V) Y中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?