奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:' R; f- a4 }1 l3 b$ J( I' k
1 R# E; W* N" z
agree,, B8 y% @. {  S2 g6 r/ D2 X" |
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
  V4 P& h& V& X& P$ z! G9 g; }但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
5 y7 r5 U! s! Y4 j/ h  a- p4 z期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

% |8 L/ g0 I* ?* A" t9 }8 @0 u
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
- Z5 R" O' i% 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/ @" d6 \/ }0 W
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.
) J) K" \. \4 y; \  ^0 AJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:7 j) k* K8 t8 x3 J
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
7 t8 F1 x; X# ~: X. G6 q" j1 {3 O" k/ G2 R% f
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???( Y, D6 }+ i9 }% |4 E2 @4 g

  S( Z1 N( }6 w. T, R5 t為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

7 ~% K! y4 B4 v7 \5 G4 v3 _
4 R0 i1 b9 H* E  {+ }: [絕對支持啦( X( }( n8 Y- c( f! q  M$ z
6 Y/ t% b  F; j. D* Y0 x
有錯就認,打就企定, G6 x' w2 d4 R+ _, m' ^, U/ Q
$ G6 c/ V( J! r& ^4 ?' [6 T
無錯當然要撐到底
* J9 D+ j# @$ @' x8 w5 C( F- U% E, W
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
1 i2 G' G+ K/ c# v  \
) I! ?2 d$ O1 }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+ R  F0 |& ~0 |: C
4 B$ r: z9 W! M) E+ Y
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力+ \+ q1 Z# ~- M4 h% r, n

4 e+ ^, f- Q+ E, I4 U我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生4 m& h, J0 w7 x! C6 M

; j9 G4 u/ J; }! W; }/ C唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
+ _( ~8 b0 ^/ }: E5 {) h' t- ^7 |* f) ]( m) B) N; R2 b
我唔認為lor% t  j! t( v$ _+ U: c

) G. B( D& _9 b7 k& r唔係話要整死佢地
, [& l# ~7 j7 m9 _# h+ ~- S
# ]& j# i9 N  k# M* Y( R! W而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用4 }  K' M. D' f# m- W
' p7 m$ }) b1 [4 c" j- g  s
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
( A7 n+ E! C/ \
) g7 e5 S4 ]/ @( i1 Y& y  W6 ]+ T有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的2 i  l; H: _" o: Z' C& L- F! g0 Y
4 k- @# c. H; R0 ]/ j+ u% E1 A' \
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由* @) w# R7 F" J1 m5 \& [/ Y

0 f% R# X+ b( l2 K3 d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
3 i6 |8 Q& s* U* U( Y( [$ X"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
8 f5 `7 F$ Y% e4 L  b. L
4 g% a: w: p: g$ T0 F! |  i3 Y我們的大學生
3 i9 a) }2 j. ~- P, N3 v: {7 R0 K2 P' {
) z" ?2 C& _3 T9 v- Y, Z; V
) |( V. b. @0 _' ?. o  s

' ?- @% g8 l, X

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
2 p3 d$ E* z" z% A- E3 _
1 q, A" j7 k+ P/ y9 s# p+ e6 ?  g" @0 r; w# K) _
有見地 !!!
) U( r/ U/ b  C  V& 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.html5 j8 r' {/ h% ~5 L" J
8 E2 y8 W" Q8 M6 o+ ~
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 4 h3 v. F- w8 k& U7 v* s
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. - `* J9 i6 f* N- |
I pretty sad that about the University official.
1 {$ R5 G8 R& z+ \5 ]5 V( OIt'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
/ Z) q6 w* @( ^  Z: f3 {7 c2 a. ]
5 X1 x. ~" `/ K- ^' i7 ]! r[ 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:  C" S! T# z: Q! D& K7 h
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
$ F/ b. s8 o- [$ O: o( X2 X" e  `# b6 X5 e( Z9 `* G( h
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

  e! I3 K  Z# ^, @) J
( W% N' U! \/ _* H" g兩者有何分別?
+ k% x) }. w. D7 A; M% j中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?