奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
' `& U0 z  {( Y$ b5 R2 m; j' m7 Q7 u( S7 N' u! T9 F( Y
agree,
- M3 _2 s  l, V, [) w+ M: \我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
+ o. M4 ]' U. C1 B& `但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,$ X6 s5 O1 d) P* [4 L! o
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

+ q/ e0 n! r& T5 L4 Ohttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html% J% V# F( f+ X4 m' F: J! 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+ y7 B! i) T. d1 y# \( j
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.
' R" l' q: i9 |2 k: mJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
; r# ?! h, [6 S8 b0 r  I% \$ I有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ) N- b( q3 @# l6 {
7 I  `4 T. x4 R' |
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???7 g/ l$ G5 R. n6 @- D- e7 F

! C+ [' T- B/ r2 ^! h為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

9 \1 Y: A) a/ f6 o, T0 ~7 o8 n0 M  P$ d" b" J
絕對支持啦& N9 @+ E5 C1 Z/ n2 i! O, z/ i$ m  }
- {) [" c2 Y' c$ |- [
有錯就認,打就企定
/ a. ?: y$ \3 Y* f/ R9 j0 J! y8 K9 x: G$ G/ I, D+ T- ?
無錯當然要撐到底
0 [6 h& L! x' ?7 F5 A$ j8 u% Z# D* p: D7 ?
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩1 s/ Q3 a" p  N$ H. w
" q0 S+ k7 E! x" O' k" W
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' T( i- r- y  I

5 W( z2 o1 p5 Z, t+ E一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
7 v- t" ]& Y% q5 d# m4 l8 g( Q- P  s9 e( ]) P% R) |
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生% F  N3 D+ z+ @0 m0 K0 w( s
9 L" l' W" M4 R0 d9 I/ H
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?2 r+ C, e& z& C7 U% E3 E& M9 x

9 r; n7 ?2 Y5 Y我唔認為lor9 [2 i0 M- }$ G  b" }  @2 X

- S1 V6 I; d8 V7 j/ M唔係話要整死佢地$ t. J' C6 N# ?* a" Q. h
+ U7 U9 @, |9 F4 V' _) \1 C# l
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用, F" q$ O- V5 i" A7 s7 f. u

" W/ d! X/ u. O3 @* k我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
% l# L( k& h6 e& R) Y& q3 z( d; ^) u. p5 t  u" v6 j
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
/ t* c( C. c  C) Y  L  R" }
& O: C- s$ S' l! @1 C) k唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
7 v+ Q. U' O* ~; q6 f- P4 c+ H' z4 K9 y% C7 }
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
, l' m; H! H% n' \"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
* V1 _% l) C. `5 }2 z0 ]; `) n4 S9 Q' G- ?* |
我們的大學生
) a  m& q& W& {" @" |  m3 E
4 o" z" ?/ t3 @" V9 O6 H! [+ Q6 o/ l! [- {6 p8 j* q

" L1 g& T- p; H, M6 C& r9 e9 q; p* P/ [( O

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
3 [3 i" j* Z/ p- w- r: m. e
) ^7 |9 i2 a6 M* D7 b* N' m
& ~; q+ W$ D$ ^& q3 V7 X* n有見地 !!!  G4 T7 T; o! W$ _$ w6 a" @
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+ f; H3 j& p, C( d7 B
2 r- o, Y9 ^6 e, Q1 Q
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
" |0 e. V. U5 l+ h# g7 OI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 3 N  b& }5 k" O  [/ G% K1 b$ L  e8 ^
I pretty sad that about the University official.- G+ m, p* o8 G2 t9 `
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$ T2 i3 [" N9 ]7 d
4 ?5 u- B3 Z  H
[ 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 17:24:2 z. [/ r6 K, D& R% Y" G
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% [; `+ {4 N* W" i( Y8 h
1 E9 G+ Y# y) l( P
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

* w, B) `9 h1 n4 |& a
/ \  U3 d0 c$ D* f$ p
兩者有何分別?6 m* U4 J% \& i% W3 Z1 b* Y
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?