奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
: e: Q6 O) x0 y  R* I5 F; R8 t/ ^$ Q# m% G
agree,
, F( I' U$ [! U我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
$ D1 ~  S, X( t& @4 @但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
, Y$ [' G. v8 Q- `0 Q; Y5 }1 k0 u7 R期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

9 L4 K: |( k( [0 Z* N) X$ f
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
5 m/ m8 O2 t' a3 y: X6 h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
/ y4 q) J/ w. ?" \8 H3 j- T7 p. q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.
5 o2 f0 u3 t9 @6 d  x; C1 xJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:8 x8 h0 b  A3 ?7 B1 [0 X& |  ~
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 5 T% Z( ~8 i2 I+ b" E2 U, \
& ~. f) W  t/ V( Z! I
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???0 t8 M4 C- d0 ]# U8 i
5 h. L5 m6 g: h6 O+ H
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

  O- m) P+ p. a# x: d! w
9 S2 h0 a! N) p絕對支持啦
1 s+ ?# i" g! B! M
2 p6 F( ?# g- O% q0 T3 Q有錯就認,打就企定
: K5 M2 V9 u# `* {4 ?
: P" Y+ [! z" w, |5 V. k無錯當然要撐到底% S# L9 T8 X+ Z) \" P5 C+ @
  S: l' p9 x9 m8 i9 y9 D
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩8 s- o+ I( k  Q! g5 o" m8 ]
9 U: [, O3 A6 D$ N# Z
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
$ i' t+ j: n. \. ]- i0 j) C$ }! k- y" V* K! S& q" l% e
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力6 ]7 T8 v/ w2 Y# h9 G
  w. P3 _* ^: ]) I, Z
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
( w4 @  q1 @- d, c: Q
- q7 H: k; k# x3 f3 I( a1 ?唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?' g- N1 {$ \6 T

; j# y& C  p& Y4 U我唔認為lor
* w7 a) O* _. V  m5 {2 v3 x/ W1 M' ]" z4 K. F& a' k$ [
唔係話要整死佢地
% ?  q6 X% T: s! `/ n8 P9 {
2 S* A3 k+ z8 w- K- B而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用! H7 ]  D# B2 }/ Z3 e* {9 C

& h2 `. f% n% x7 a5 ?我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
: m" y, J. m. b! c* I: T9 t7 o9 h
8 n6 k9 N" \; G# {) V有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
0 @+ m# h( j3 e' Q
( _1 [) Z' a' E. r! l2 ]* Q4 t# ^唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由: r* {: d/ B6 e8 Q' ?2 P

! I. _* {+ [; j2 c6 i* c, u' o5 ]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1 x# J& c4 Y+ C, f( b! X2 Y3 M
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"2 B8 T& H( H1 b0 }9 P7 I

/ e2 s8 ]4 ?% v我們的大學生& o' v' F7 v2 H* F7 e' ^% Y
; r7 E7 {6 D. [. I, v, _  t6 p! L
& f6 Q5 n& w+ u6 X! |

1 ]) k; r; u/ z' }0 a* h% M/ a* x0 j  y5 c

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
3 s  u2 ], Q8 P; z; u  [* S
( t, c9 M) h: x! h; N1 i7 A( O; g2 k" X% |# \+ a
有見地 !!!
. y* r; M1 }( e% q3 c8 n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! K* K, \# ~7 z

# u$ |7 d# ?5 h( ^: q1 ]I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
( ^9 r" ]: n0 Z( JI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ( p& j# ~  n5 C5 r4 M) ]# U0 r
I pretty sad that about the University official.% n6 P$ s2 Z& h' E' M" |6 K( J
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
( j: B. C7 }6 f, C9 k/ J
3 V( W" s# b. c0 o: e, F$ P' M6 a[ 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 h( s) |1 }- @
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
5 b0 ?+ E4 ^- a0 U+ l/ J5 o" g/ g, P4 u" A) v9 X) L  d
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

+ k* w/ s' k3 }) E/ _* a: q/ b
$ _6 _: W8 h# K/ M* O$ d2 R兩者有何分別?
5 y; c5 e  S) ]- K+ t3 q! R中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?