奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
5 H) r# N* F/ i6 \; \
) G/ k. A5 W1 x' ^5 y6 Vagree,
, K& C+ r+ J  U5 U& J我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
$ p' m& c( r2 G" x5 U. x- ]但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,/ L2 b' v2 o9 `( f. d3 }  W: D
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

  _2 t4 E0 q2 u
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
# G8 r2 v& f: \1 Q$ A% C! S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
1 R6 H% u* d6 |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.7 K# X3 X0 {3 b9 P
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
! Q7 n% y- D; Y; e* K+ d2 |有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
7 `, R1 P8 L5 b6 j$ U' @
) z- R  o- n: s係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???( A+ A  g& Z9 R3 ]. B
  \( j) H8 ^2 S
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 L  \; E+ g# E  ]4 m1 D) m

9 M8 N$ @" Z& W4 T) L; m/ G# @4 p% g絕對支持啦0 @' k1 H# e/ b+ u6 I0 P

6 {4 y3 i7 G; _( N7 r, U7 F* j7 c有錯就認,打就企定  ], X1 Y( w7 o4 t4 N1 n# {8 I- u/ N
5 a, U6 l  O1 q. F. @; B( L
無錯當然要撐到底; |; }' t7 M3 E  ^+ i
) t& ^. q: ~3 X, t7 B
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩) c- y( g: D+ k8 w

  D5 q5 z" Y( y4 ?% \; ^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 }3 n4 A4 r2 I' b  d. X5 N
0 h1 I, O+ I3 R* {7 }( M, T8 f一份公眾讀物係好有影響力8 @7 R% j. c; W

7 D0 a3 R# t: u- M, f: H" L( S- G我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生$ i! _- b, c+ q2 Z% i

& Y" Z* C3 L6 ^6 y; H* R唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
& m, L' l" M7 V, b8 p' I. P
! \# G& g8 L3 \' |9 ^我唔認為lor
0 _8 n0 _5 p! o' D
$ P- u  S! J  F9 `4 M+ c唔係話要整死佢地3 D2 d5 P) u! L+ _- l/ \3 C
+ ^4 f/ ]5 S* s0 a: z4 D3 J9 U
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用& T" x3 m( j& J! K

* V. [4 m8 A8 o* k" P我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
4 H: I' y! R5 k1 B3 z
0 ^. t* a7 X% U- l, L9 z有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的0 y/ S+ _- }+ o6 B- t" `
4 I. t8 ^5 x# g% {' u) @8 E+ k
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由9 W& d9 a6 I7 A( ~1 e! A5 y
3 n2 j" m% H# F9 ?
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
4 R- Y" s: M5 m/ \6 `; P4 t"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 \+ t3 p( x3 C% y% p4 I9 Z8 E8 X- _; [
我們的大學生
6 A  F3 L, G/ U( C7 w
# i9 d" {$ a$ _. W) m) C% O2 h
7 W! e# n" r; Y2 ^3 m, J/ p  E" i3 E' @7 ^$ m9 T

+ P, V( a0 k9 |: s) {4 t2 |

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
$ l" e: O; }3 P6 ?) h- ]9 L5 L0 J; t; {

, b. y$ e) I* Q, {. P( P有見地 !!!+ K7 ?6 X0 l  S
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& `8 S' D) V9 x/ Z
' q* x, l3 H4 O) R
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
6 U1 r2 r) ^7 Y0 E# z2 a$ n* fI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
9 C2 p. `5 o6 }, f. y6 H. k, _' fI pretty sad that about the University official.2 D7 \' l: m! c9 ~$ @3 e  s
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( ?# u- R9 c, z6 |9 w/ S6 u7 T+ S

+ w! `8 F! B8 z0 R" w4 t, ~6 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:$ q9 C  G* `5 y$ U' c" c9 L
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
/ j, w3 i9 V8 H; W: G( C/ P* v; \" c# b1 o, Q0 i3 E( g
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

6 Q  O" b4 Q6 {+ T1 l- d# f

" Z' ]. y) B* a; o$ x兩者有何分別?6 L# A4 {% F* x9 F* S5 G
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?