奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
9 z4 x. R6 z/ T) ~/ y& s9 A% ?5 G( [9 u8 v+ |* E- D( q
agree,$ J- l! O% L6 v$ G! }
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
% @* @6 B4 b; t% z$ c但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
: A% G" n- M; }期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

! ?- @4 n/ ~1 m. Ihttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
* t5 o4 V4 L$ A+ \. D8 t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( j' I; y) ]& {+ y
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.
  y9 F8 K1 @& YJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
& y2 a1 M/ h- [% ^有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
8 Z; L* d; G% S  c+ _$ k) F+ Z
# y0 D/ c, g9 ~; z係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???7 }8 _. m9 y& q; ]9 }! w
+ p9 ~) t; F0 L% _! Q- }( N6 Q
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 l' C- j+ W9 t
: T1 h6 g! Q/ q0 ~絕對支持啦
/ ~. A6 t6 Q0 H, U* @7 c
; S" ^0 V# V4 L( m+ x$ }有錯就認,打就企定7 t2 L; c& `6 H" _) V. t
- E0 ]4 M2 i, |" i, A  L
無錯當然要撐到底
% \+ P- z- j% K& j( `2 u) ]6 u7 _! Z$ A
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩$ G  a9 ^4 Y3 g" `/ L
8 s# R3 f4 y0 A7 a! \
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
8 w) R* q2 |" y6 r+ C5 w# |0 Y
: @: H+ z. s. t0 W0 c' L一份公眾讀物係好有影響力* A% R; O3 v6 N7 s
- `! q, j1 G( D; I) e" z0 k3 f5 @
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生/ k' W9 Q. X2 B( f7 Y
: P6 g. b$ W' u
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?; Y7 W* w, Q. f5 Z4 m8 b) Q

3 F+ _9 U% x# l! m5 a1 o我唔認為lor
; w( I% L5 b4 p; T8 I2 w" t( ]! n* h
唔係話要整死佢地
: _8 {. C' L" c  i9 u! q2 ?8 o4 ~' L( B* p2 k9 J5 }. x
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
4 X3 C& E- o; w; o& T1 `7 T: h  Z5 f' _
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
: N( O5 n9 X' F4 q& T- c4 \& I. N
/ }# V2 D! q8 S+ o+ d5 P- U# g1 ]有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
: K& ^( p& J( M0 C7 p  R) a) ^, \' X( s4 c  Z9 `2 P( r  I2 b0 a
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由8 F& Y  w9 m! h. L: D* P
; A6 _. a2 y  F. {; 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
) h/ s2 W& {8 U6 p6 {"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
1 F5 \% x+ m3 [0 Z5 |/ J
0 c$ l" N* x8 v, V' h  [) A我們的大學生
% l8 p# i. L+ u& ]6 b5 E* f8 E
* r9 e' H: a) n# R' z1 Z$ m
. W7 i& e8 [. M) o, Y' z: E, N6 ~2 ~7 }+ G6 M( b1 x' ?0 K8 R
! P( k3 s7 L8 `+ N( R

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
9 X2 w- a0 E' t* X6 j; C+ U4 G6 |* U$ {. f9 f$ |
1 y" m: i) l/ n
有見地 !!!
6 p3 u4 G6 p6 a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
+ g2 D  Q# R1 p% B, s
  Y! f+ c! g' Z  ?3 z7 s6 PI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. . E6 H' a4 X* v
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
+ C7 @+ b& H. |( k) j( I2 jI pretty sad that about the University official.
5 b6 F5 Z0 \! NIt'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/ h/ I6 W% n2 U/ ~8 y
' j, ~3 {0 @3 C, g0 l: B[ 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:( I1 X  e# n+ Q, U& O6 |
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* s6 n% \' o( K0 x" g( u5 J

" F/ @- C( [9 }) G9 T[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

! e& v. L$ P9 l1 y& `

3 H  }4 T( q" i/ Z' }兩者有何分別?
- U9 j5 o2 Q5 J$ P+ l中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?