奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
! ^% F* b; V+ F% k
7 N5 c! j# f5 qagree,2 Y6 f6 g7 I8 Q
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
* y7 u# p+ \- W' {/ ]' j0 O5 d! W但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,0 g) m; w# ~% A3 E! ^
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

* P2 e1 V# r' L5 w& lhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html8 I  V) d" A1 _1 x" K0 h7 @5 r
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
) a/ J, R9 p; f" T2 D3 [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.
8 c: Z! \* l  _# FJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:& j' c& U: W  e4 h" L9 z+ Z8 v
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
/ w4 |1 h& |) Z7 Q1 n$ j: x6 H! Q& M; I
+ f( e, o1 e7 ?係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???0 p  _# I0 ?4 C# v: B1 ~& ~7 Z

$ A, H, X& G, j1 G為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

; K5 t# C# K% L. y6 g4 H
6 @! w5 O: J8 Q  I
絕對支持啦1 Z2 F& u9 q% N" c
% T3 C3 l% K7 d% }( |5 T
有錯就認,打就企定
( T! ^6 G6 k& D6 x$ o; W  M/ G  {( P  b: q1 k/ e. a$ w
無錯當然要撐到底- O3 O# E- Y7 S# ?" q  b/ ?0 S9 M2 h- l
6 n6 i! p. z2 k0 j# s
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩  `- _. w* p. W4 x
. |% r, k4 G+ |; b: A3 B: |
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5 r' [8 |# [1 b) g8 z2 O9 z

3 y4 s; j& }( I+ b一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& Z% E4 ]/ M, [/ R/ i. }
: H# y8 `7 w9 O- J1 W2 `. ~) Z
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
$ l3 H' r* ^1 p6 t' s0 b1 u
% T$ ^/ S% Q9 x8 F8 c. `+ p' N9 S唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?( j  Y, ^* [9 @3 m

5 r# u! e4 f5 K# h3 O我唔認為lor) }' a8 q' }1 h" w$ N
% ^6 {/ [, g+ a: l* ?
唔係話要整死佢地
5 ~1 h! B& }- g( @! k) W
, h/ p* N, k( T  q+ [2 _  U  U而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
" Q0 Q6 b+ p) t  V6 A' T2 s6 U  t& e+ s
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
# _7 _. ^& `- |3 `
* I: h. Y+ o5 b3 l9 G6 j+ q有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
' a6 \' _& U" z3 J! S4 r4 W5 c& a7 j) R1 e/ Z
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
! Y1 y, Q; U- ]' z- L; ~" R8 _, A5 {2 n! G: ]
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
1 y3 C# V9 V4 K# N* 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"& j9 S* q2 k0 G# T8 @# F

' ~/ n. S; M8 K9 v; ~我們的大學生
8 ?. ^1 S% D# j8 t
" _7 x; _/ u, t* j' N1 s1 t6 _0 M& n
) T3 c8 t+ W* o1 o; E+ T9 a6 p* v- L6 l
) C0 v2 J% B. q! L

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:# z. M8 J- {' {+ X8 J! q5 h; e, |

( h0 H4 g6 A2 s- ]3 V) r# F$ B1 b, m, o5 u
有見地 !!!
9 S6 E  _, ^/ @- x0 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
4 e4 @# C. S+ Q; g' q* e- }: J- F6 s0 E, l: X
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 6 d% n# c- `  ^8 C! b
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
+ c5 q& g* _" K1 Y/ o2 i" O/ `# g, yI pretty sad that about the University official.. _# s- p% B, X5 U$ j2 d
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; O: ~7 r& z- a: g( l* p, l, v
3 H2 }$ p- e: G- c! t
[ 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:
: ~1 H. J; h* j- V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) a) l) X& _9 R! D# L

' O" J; ?6 d+ W& d[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" Q5 ]+ o: P7 X5 w/ p0 w& o- h. w
  ~# y9 A5 Y  J+ h
兩者有何分別?
% R# q6 B  k" C0 x' W( Z中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?