奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
" M  U- g- ~" ^4 W& }1 z
9 w$ R% L- G2 k7 Z& j5 _9 _agree,
% Q: d) |# j( h( |我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,/ d# \7 W( T. s" B; U
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,5 @0 F1 i2 B+ F4 s3 a: A6 ?: g
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

' W# r2 m* V6 L  ?4 B7 b5 @
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
& {: d, S. Z/ H$ `9 N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( r+ ~! G5 y: I( 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.
5 M  R7 t, ?% F3 Z/ q+ k" DJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
! k9 f/ K% Q+ o! G, Z' w有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ , h4 R7 ?' b7 B. }0 \" }  \* y) u
- }8 C- y6 ~4 ]  A8 C& b. n: Z! _6 x% R
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???" N0 ~: Q/ F' ^" I/ b) |! |7 ^& L
; x4 F7 C$ W: G# F# u: N) m2 Q) l
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

# K- N  h. U  U. I# u/ e% T" s

9 c) i* d3 f  S! J, D7 E3 h絕對支持啦5 u3 \3 b& m) R" `
, ^+ `8 W$ ~0 p6 |( d& e! p
有錯就認,打就企定
* a" J: p6 @' q5 |$ Y+ x2 y! \- z, q4 h! ?( l
無錯當然要撐到底* [6 Z! r+ I+ T- T
! n; v6 S# @: q+ a6 V% k% O
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩& [5 ]) ?0 v2 c4 r- k

, ~! c1 G! u$ b% {" j. m5 R) k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+ S( J5 U% }( K( b$ _7 ~

4 Y7 @  V4 w- l% U一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
# @: V% v  R" z; c* l; Q1 y* q: U% g& r) B7 B2 v/ c& ?3 w) J' b9 c
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
  o4 C5 l9 D4 y5 D- ?3 t: T0 X5 }; S
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
& h, R. f0 \" {, F8 Q; r, e1 Y$ `% ^$ x
我唔認為lor4 a# L! e6 M" o" B

" h4 D, W7 h* Y1 {$ M- v唔係話要整死佢地& t4 n0 n  i' K* Q  c3 K
6 s- i- q6 x1 j/ ^# Z7 g
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用& n! \0 Z* p* ?9 c8 G( n3 ~

1 @) \/ v0 g" Y- ]( a我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大2 N" O0 Y- K; ~. N5 H2 }3 k
( i2 v" v- c1 `$ X. L
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的1 U( M. \" T  o' F" n
, W7 ~: I: N$ ?7 r2 g
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
( r3 ?% T3 V2 K" D
# ]8 F8 t. x1 u& V5 h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& z3 ]8 O3 j* q8 R( a( `6 o6 T$ l% o
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"# t4 h/ |' }$ D8 O3 z' H
( J8 T5 n; I1 x/ T
我們的大學生, b) N) U6 g# S9 Z
' Z6 U# b% a  Q4 `5 p! ~- `

+ f; b# l0 W! \9 J+ x. D
; f1 @: U3 z, l1 u5 K0 R, M& [8 B+ W  P/ @  L6 [' l, \  g

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:6 D$ b: k: Q; J% O

0 N8 K" e7 D2 t& q3 }
8 ?" P! F: |" Y  f有見地 !!!4 w  Y- Z- ~0 h8 ?& 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
8 {$ r* X) p0 U3 w7 B9 Z/ m
8 Y& |6 {  @4 Z4 `I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
( \7 v7 \) h6 w& BI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. + F/ b6 V2 L0 |2 w; b
I pretty sad that about the University official.
' `* _2 [8 _9 |5 A8 }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
% ]6 Q& Z& ?2 K2 o6 u2 P6 f) n9 s9 t* |
[ 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:
( ?' V% l) m3 T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$ }/ b9 a" I* D% W- ^9 m4 f

7 r( B* R: ^& d; |! Z[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

; W: \* X. _. x

  H% t5 Z" k. ^4 y; ]; f  Z兩者有何分別?
! u* B& b! R8 Z1 D中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?