奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:# o: Z' I% o! }2 E0 [% |5 Q

+ \" m! d2 ~0 L* aagree,
! e; r7 q1 u2 {! W) Z1 e0 O) X+ k我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,4 {6 p' C7 w! \
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,1 ]' ^0 p; d1 U; b3 u. i# ]
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

3 X- P8 S" U& A3 Y: zhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
0 c0 ~" m' W. p; L5 f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  I% L/ N, f7 r5 n- 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.
$ W3 Z! ?; a7 X" BJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
/ U% V* X; N% Z, o; D" r& t有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
, G) x' l! d4 }+ y7 P/ ^* v3 X8 k4 ^6 x, k
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???9 S, _, _( z- ^  b
  n. u+ k- D6 Z! }! g2 O7 F
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

1 z$ O/ m; u3 k# D; B9 Z. j0 A; v5 n, l2 W6 P% A. r7 h
絕對支持啦4 b  L+ I0 u' K. j

% d3 y6 [# I, g9 D6 s$ ~5 E有錯就認,打就企定
* H5 z" v9 k8 a* S* o8 m$ i2 v; c. E& h0 n; r" l( b
無錯當然要撐到底
3 j8 v; U) O0 s4 ]8 W- C! ?. [" [3 H0 v
8 c, S' o) u7 w. x4 s' Z) D6 W但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
6 S) S4 b1 ]! x
* Q5 S) G9 T4 r4 ~9 U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
" K% S2 ]- O% p. v5 [% ]+ T2 n% O' ^
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力- e* T8 j  d% p* i1 F& @: r. Q  i

! z, d* F9 d* @2 d  F2 \( W1 Z" y我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生. O: l' _- U6 I
% _/ `+ O1 E2 g& S
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?* P" A1 r$ y9 `. `- ]* x1 j

3 D. U* m0 L0 D0 r我唔認為lor1 R: `2 t% I6 Q% H" A6 K
- g$ T' L5 A: N" ^9 ~% p' m; K
唔係話要整死佢地! ]& E3 j. u$ o6 \

/ q, G' {: N% }$ a而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用. Y2 D9 N$ Y) M' j& ]( h, a
- l* O' n. o$ w+ R2 S: c# Q
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大/ a: `( x* F2 Z. S
* v, B1 L; O& F/ W4 f$ o* ~
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的; _! s6 l' h# W6 [

2 P! A. x. j* ^1 f, q" b/ Q唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由8 E) U6 H3 E4 d1 G$ W

2 u8 a3 _& G& R2 i& A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
0 l  j( x0 }" Z" k) e"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"6 N+ r; Q, c* ~

( `# D$ u% s1 z/ D5 [我們的大學生
+ `: |5 e5 @' D9 I$ M: `4 H+ h
3 z: U5 a3 X" P; H$ o6 w" `! b0 R* U" R" v

) l7 t+ \4 j0 T+ [' U/ f
  d! r( Y5 z, k

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
, X3 l( Z* ~1 @# g6 _
5 s+ J8 T6 ]8 S
; o0 l# p" B" |1 h* [有見地 !!!5 U/ O4 e6 ?4 c3 a" V: D# V
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.html7 x- i+ t* ?# [* |

6 q9 w% d. {7 Z: z: ]/ UI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 5 J( _2 Y' A  U
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
* C3 z8 E% s9 y( \5 nI pretty sad that about the University official.
) [3 p! E1 H8 GIt'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
+ w, F2 E7 x; f) h+ {" E2 v! t( B" C) i. \: s8 u: d! l
[ 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:
+ b6 L, r1 F% C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 la3 v" R2 H9 q& u' V  m
9 H2 p8 F' K% P1 f# Q3 V
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

/ e5 E/ Z3 U3 a' {5 F; N, Q9 Y2 W# [4 a3 z8 b. ?- l
兩者有何分別?
- A% ]1 I  z: `4 X中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?