奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
" Y' Q$ C) \) q8 ~" R; k/ j
" v7 T& \) D/ I! x2 `: jagree,
* g3 A+ F9 r+ d( B  H我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,0 C0 T3 a& y5 L' U7 f! z* z
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
1 c+ Z+ r( D  d3 C, p期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 c- [5 Q/ a9 K& j$ o5 Lhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html8 p9 g( e( p% q2 O9 E$ L  J
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
  f/ w% }6 \8 |( m+ B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 `5 i; o/ Y/ N2 _) VJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
) n8 j, G( i5 ~* `有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 4 Q! A, P3 M( o, G

% ]! V  I2 T- ]8 b+ d( q係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???9 z/ W( A2 l% w
' R8 T* @. S; d4 `
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

3 @( Y" Q6 f6 H2 r2 ]+ a8 [6 o' ~! ?# S3 M8 ^5 m9 ^
絕對支持啦4 ^' S' F7 M7 {8 N

/ E) S6 x! i3 B% q. a; R' k有錯就認,打就企定& {( h: @" p% b

7 F/ {: s2 W5 Z, a" R無錯當然要撐到底1 h4 N' w: k; Q' ~
  [2 A. D5 l! P. C% p  o; V
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩- r# ]( [2 M" i8 n5 x/ A

9 j0 t( I& f. F# J6 M0 n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
& P2 N: E4 H$ {/ ]  s# F! m5 z
4 @' i, Q" m  J+ b/ ^# G一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
1 N9 y, R9 C8 @, z# C- g8 n0 I) c" W
' r. t( U2 E7 M; b1 |: K我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
2 b% O6 C/ M0 X& W
- K% e6 F9 q) O# r  d+ G5 y5 |  a1 t唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?# u; M# v% U+ t

9 y* J5 }6 q4 ?; `/ q1 P我唔認為lor  h/ s6 [6 R( q5 O2 g
' [# U7 u4 S/ s$ j2 b1 J
唔係話要整死佢地7 ]0 I* Q: ?' I6 d6 k7 s

. i! C% {* |' H, p而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用! u- k' A3 Y' f9 D
; s  ?) t, @  d2 R3 Y
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
7 @( O/ H3 p' }
; M' a# u4 J8 h' g有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的3 G( j# ~$ k9 V; [% A7 M4 R
" [9 V5 D, E" [1 U( D
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
$ q/ J' g6 l# m- ~
' V- ?, g2 I/ R1 z& o* U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& m' t( W; z0 a"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"* q) `: y4 x( a0 u

9 P7 x6 ?" G/ J3 }' D% d+ x3 R3 Y! E我們的大學生; a. x0 @# [: d5 n
" @' J9 r0 |; l- [0 s1 H3 h7 l
7 ~" r7 E& C. m/ }# }

* d. b- \# N9 N0 j, H- w
$ o: T9 x$ h! ?9 ~

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
4 `! S% ?- ~  C. X) m* j- ^* O
& n, |, b9 V; L1 ~5 f  i. s0 s4 L$ w
有見地 !!!
  \! b3 x7 U* D6 G* Y8 E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
- u* ]- y+ t4 g  \- B. a: a$ w
5 g3 E. \1 c) x% mI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
$ a" M1 b$ I/ h" T- e2 mI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
' Y' C% a, c/ j! t9 N5 [) YI pretty sad that about the University official.
" R3 @- F- @# b6 Y( O7 DIt'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+ l  ~0 t; H3 P+ c1 d
5 v8 S- {' j, P. x8 H; Q+ b
[ 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:
$ n/ T9 c/ X2 g# l( x8 W4 Q! t/ t6 O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 e! _5 J- K4 i" d$ k

* x% f1 z. b1 I* o" B* y( ~6 h[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

, Z) }* V: I- K; N- ^2 s( d

* F0 R3 a6 A+ \8 S' R/ r- H兩者有何分別?6 m  W' {; b4 m6 B' L" A
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?