奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
2 p, ]6 d! p- N" i2 O' N& f+ }* I, N/ `: j9 |1 F* e% d
agree,. ?0 \5 ]" d9 p) m, i3 p
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
$ O' \2 u7 F/ U- t. h. @但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,: S. `2 R+ {" H. z: ?) K
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

6 a6 k+ l# d9 Uhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html. z4 K. Q% u$ K: ^& i
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
3 Y0 w1 Y; O) O% L4 S9 S4 }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.$ S6 S) m: v& i$ c$ G( d" G  X# Y
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:& v- t' y5 L) b; o+ _, M7 d" g5 I
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
; ^8 z8 o2 o/ x, ~8 ~. }
$ d/ K  R# [. m  u係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???' q0 _( q3 t4 g* }
3 z! F9 u7 p6 x7 w( ^7 P) f/ g/ Z
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

! C4 |4 D! I, i, P' M

8 w2 k) n, q" ?6 n1 v3 Q, a絕對支持啦8 e* B8 w  P  A) m5 U% W) z
$ m2 H/ B2 F* H
有錯就認,打就企定
' X$ _# q5 a7 b4 R3 R
3 s6 ?0 p. |% K6 S7 [5 g3 C無錯當然要撐到底' x$ w  L1 ^- x! K$ Y/ F& v5 ]: F

/ m3 |/ r5 H% m( e! S3 ~但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
  a( F5 @3 Z: \! N3 F& P9 n, g& R/ S+ b' }* J
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
7 d! d# p8 `- F) }# i- u0 s  {! Z3 Q& q. j; F& H7 j1 q- f+ o3 v( q
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& q2 ~" A: H$ w; q: V& l8 j

! t( ^0 Y" l' Y1 H. b: P我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生, S' p) l4 a& Y! V; u5 ]- T
  s, k$ \' d+ d7 r$ E
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?. B% U) h" d5 M, V9 R; ~) I
: A2 `  w6 q5 Z2 @8 |
我唔認為lor4 B8 H9 a  X/ x6 a4 m# N6 W4 o
$ c6 K) ~8 R, z8 X9 o$ L
唔係話要整死佢地
2 P( j- M3 t) {6 i
8 r! B& |  ~  L; Q而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用- h. R3 m6 z+ N
4 a& o4 a4 m* [8 [# Y3 T. r
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大  C5 d+ ~, O4 e- a9 v5 {
/ S' Q1 u8 `8 h9 N' }
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
" Q; j4 s9 z4 U' l# L" a) f( ]- i  M0 k8 {: p5 P
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
' @3 ~0 D* n. ?2 k
' v' H* N! {  F+ e) F( R4 _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( b3 ]+ X# i. e9 e7 k
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
- G5 p/ u+ ]% e) t( o7 O  a% }
, @3 [4 }- W) V: N我們的大學生0 i: Q' Z' T7 ?7 h4 v- u- U
! ~& r- p# K9 L
3 i5 W4 r: P( u; S+ C* D/ `3 {
* D( n% ?! t3 Y% G4 `

" n7 a( |* w5 T' a

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:) v3 S" R; L8 x, L
/ R5 n3 j0 ~) d0 }) Q8 X% v6 v- p
& N) K6 \9 M/ K6 e2 m+ m# U
有見地 !!!" C. t+ J% F: O% G6 }3 F
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
8 \7 R' @* h* [$ q8 O# ?( U; s0 B  b2 k0 W1 W& D. V2 a0 ^/ b) H
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
  S8 w& W/ f) f/ K9 W2 j  PI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. $ T4 k: k: @4 R3 h0 y2 P" c, U0 l) ~
I pretty sad that about the University official.
2 P, n4 e' J$ @! ?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 la9 A- v' S: Y: n0 Q- ]1 Y

  o! L. ^0 F7 N, k+ u[ 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:" H: k8 x. j. x3 Y% Y
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 la9 B# W& b  O5 ~( g5 j4 C
2 q4 ~1 Q% z+ J9 C/ g4 {, J
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

( c( ^7 N) i. ^4 s$ J
7 p3 a1 T# h/ @. J0 T兩者有何分別?
7 n- _) w/ B( [4 E7 Y6 W' T) _中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?