奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
- H! F$ Z3 }. ~% J3 ~9 V
. g4 B' \3 C! F& [agree,& y7 J9 e* M# y/ D/ m7 B8 _
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
+ P* X" P; d2 b5 |但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,3 n8 U- y6 i& N: I
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

- ~2 o2 ]& w/ J8 G  n9 Mhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
% a/ N$ g% ?5 F. Y1 z% e8 e, o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
) s; S- \4 _3 ?  p- ^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.
* c2 u+ f/ @$ |1 }7 RJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:3 l/ ]4 K& e! K: E" i" _& [4 K
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ( I0 i, t% D! }7 `5 ~% D

8 s6 g" E/ P7 i) N% }係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
: c8 d, w; I9 c+ i9 u4 R" f
1 B) U) n! m: N5 Y為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

+ L& S6 u* s3 _1 J6 Z- I* X% e  B4 s! j- Y1 d
絕對支持啦: u: z+ r$ Q) p

' E4 K% |5 ~! A, h: l有錯就認,打就企定
+ L6 _5 ?# j. A0 ]" _1 G. x% C8 R
無錯當然要撐到底: L7 n& p2 n) K( h% H
) z* w9 G& a" i9 ?3 }9 \
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
/ |) k* B! v/ D* d" W; `- w- C, h2 c3 V. K, w1 `0 S# \3 E/ e
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
6 e6 b: u+ x9 ]. G# p; O9 y# r
( u, S( r8 s# {0 C+ }' b' _5 ]一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
: e8 z% k& M8 E8 `1 ]# W
) F4 D, V! g( I我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生* I5 h. Z0 d8 [8 _  [* A
! j- B+ z7 L4 ]
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
4 J8 N! J6 v, u* y" ?! Z
9 A2 v  @5 _2 c. J我唔認為lor) a( M9 U7 e7 M. J) _1 k! x' q
$ D! o  O- R* M0 l# f: G
唔係話要整死佢地
0 K% ?- p* }0 ]9 }- ?7 H
$ }0 i+ F* Q& g4 i- e" F) f而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用4 s% b" r6 C9 f% `% Y/ x
+ o; x* v/ T) Z( I6 ]$ Q
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大, C& ?6 C; b6 j  ^, U8 @# D0 i$ Y
. r8 q$ u8 }8 ?- Y" y9 ?1 T+ a1 u
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
+ [# ]" Q/ ]5 A* N8 C' c# x/ K" C; P5 ?1 y  R& \# |# W/ s
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
  e8 N0 Q7 ]7 a* v, Z0 C; j5 `+ f8 j/ B; v) c: v
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' C' _/ K8 J
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
- o; p. }9 l, A! x4 Z+ h; U1 L+ Q, }- e
我們的大學生
% B& y3 K# a0 D2 `4 Y
$ y3 w* M- Q7 e7 m& }  p) q: W/ B* D+ c; ?

+ r0 }6 x0 H$ r% T5 O# p- m
+ U; M1 M. P* H

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:  I- j* s. a3 X+ o& Q+ r: M

$ C( s- W1 H! V. V; R  c# s, C0 f
. }1 w, ]. B1 j3 D( @$ m有見地 !!!6 N. o) @/ ]& {
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
" M) h: m# ~) R6 L- }/ ~
1 C$ _- `, d+ s: Q. Q4 |  w7 O$ s6 FI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
  _/ u& t7 F: K2 cI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 5 Y. z3 J) V6 K2 z( E0 c# G
I pretty sad that about the University official.
2 O5 c/ I+ l+ m! d! SIt'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
8 t9 G& k5 k' X3 ?  q2 g% m% f  _7 t4 L2 J  F# [0 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 17:24:0 ~/ ?. _% L9 s9 n) E
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
, H( Q* _/ S9 \5 {% n, J
6 _" @% b: S3 a: _: g3 R9 R( K[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

. o5 O) O8 @- e4 `
- i  L: F8 E0 q4 L# x兩者有何分別?
! C3 N8 f9 j1 Q中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?