奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:( {4 ?% R1 ?9 e- ]4 Q# O, j. n+ A

; Q; K! l  g  gagree,
* y, b/ C3 O  Z我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
4 n( \4 |- q0 A8 m1 w) D7 z5 c但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
5 L5 \1 |0 b* _/ X期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

8 S" B" q1 ~8 d/ G, i" i6 {
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
" W3 {8 S$ ^5 f( Z7 p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6 P, d: e# u3 ]; g  m
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.) p3 z; w" k5 p) a
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
6 ?; |' K1 E& D: D. S3 T4 q; Q1 ?有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
1 ?4 E4 b5 \1 J5 i5 Z% Q! l5 ~( m. M/ m
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???% x8 H6 S( m5 y6 e% Z$ w4 e8 e

" s/ L6 t! F- s7 ~# j為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

) j5 l  v: s# r. g. S6 ^8 a; j/ U

7 ~3 T# B: s; v) v8 |絕對支持啦* v, r: s/ o2 Y6 w3 e6 O2 {! F

( Z4 e% o1 r9 b有錯就認,打就企定
( G- k" p0 d+ J. Y4 q/ |  W0 Y& D  @6 y
無錯當然要撐到底
$ s) I* }% Q- P3 f: h! s3 k+ M1 M8 j4 R3 [. N: z
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩0 ?8 c# R4 J/ |+ Y  p

6 e. I3 U) r5 k& m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* l" Z* t4 f( p0 \) V
* G4 `& ]" L( {
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
7 B6 P, n! T& M; I6 z( h% ?/ V8 w1 @5 X- d
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生9 i( L) }/ O5 I
! b6 O+ P  Z: m4 Z6 S9 f
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?- i) B% R* @/ e! u  H" o. R
5 S" R! D% b$ n* K! B5 R, `+ A
我唔認為lor
5 L0 i% r; q$ [* z8 i" `
4 ]; j/ _" ^# A+ o8 K唔係話要整死佢地1 S9 [; |6 o( C

0 T8 i9 S# b7 v9 X  s而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
4 X: Z$ z6 [* B- T& V; C, c' l' s
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大% U3 j9 w7 d& e) L% ~( M

" Y: T' J6 |* {3 B! N# \! r; n! o有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
# y8 d- A/ c; ~1 C$ P
( C5 k7 E% D/ `9 i唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
! u* n9 u0 t+ E. D: V& D8 p; n" v" M  A3 [) C6 m
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# v/ l: @" i) g3 K# G& H"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非". _" u1 Z3 q' ^' ~# Y. _; x
2 i6 P1 W8 b- l$ s% Y
我們的大學生* v9 j8 ]8 r) ?' H8 G3 m( k; ?2 a
! U2 N% B, ^0 T6 V" m5 T7 K- f
' ]9 w# _+ Q: M5 R! P8 x) O

: }- a+ y1 b, w) Z8 ?4 C
  j" ^8 i% u) g4 e- h

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
! a) [$ ^# J, e: H2 s2 J. _& v  n+ @$ Y' ^

. l; x$ Z. O! Y3 c6 E6 p) m有見地 !!!2 N# F$ S7 c0 y
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.html8 y: v( j7 Y  ?) }
7 L  K6 J" {' ^, M/ T
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 9 |8 n$ ^5 ?' r( ~; c9 h2 D' N$ U  b, D
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
' Y. w( v4 D: G) F" w: D0 F- NI pretty sad that about the University official.4 g; L0 c* M- \$ u$ `
It'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
  H# _4 f. {+ }1 R4 a4 a' B
- a! v4 J/ G' F5 q[ 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:; M; S5 x% Z* I1 m( L3 R
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
3 r+ L9 T) Q7 M* a/ Q6 `8 E2 z4 Q' p& x) O
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

1 b! ^/ k, A; }1 B

- a2 B$ k- Y  [8 K+ i兩者有何分別?1 C6 f. Z9 ]$ x5 ?1 }9 V+ R: e
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?