奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
% K- i) V9 a" X9 x1 l- Q# P, R* C! y
agree,4 @3 b/ Y; O4 x; M' L6 B9 M
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,3 w! X6 y4 ?! \0 x
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
' ?" N$ \0 d# a' k# U8 p5 c期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

- V; ~( F8 ^3 G+ l
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html( B% A7 |3 ]  c% y$ Q
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
: ]. c* W/ j8 r- I; o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.
( `" l( g5 P( v# p- t9 y8 UJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
5 a) X. r; a7 r/ `  f$ e+ q$ O! C* ]有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 1 {5 f% a' d; K" X8 V/ \! l; i

8 D! N. V+ ]6 r8 ~3 d8 r係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
" h6 v/ Z1 _) d% d* f, M2 e% A4 }/ r
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

! \' T8 d; z. y! j
7 \% b7 ]2 _! e
絕對支持啦
; z/ D! a* L5 w3 L2 m
, g* c' {3 ?1 S4 Z8 j4 q, @有錯就認,打就企定
- r3 `7 F2 m& l' ^, O+ r. ^
- i* P' e8 h/ Q# U9 e5 w3 J無錯當然要撐到底
; g3 K) v0 W# L
& b6 r$ g0 w/ Q+ v. P8 l& g2 K0 J: [但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
; N  A0 C, x, x5 Y$ K+ b0 J8 o3 {& D2 u1 x. _1 a1 }+ M% r) R
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
' p1 B: d3 s9 `; E$ `: k
1 L; \4 L2 Y5 S" l% P3 r一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
5 T/ L7 I; p% ~! X  |$ M& e' d1 b% F" a2 o4 `3 U
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生8 s) k6 Z9 b' }' U+ A5 I
: \+ X$ Z8 h  j) O1 n  l8 h' n- b
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?% O; h1 ?% P& t+ B/ p, o% Q- c9 L

$ N) d3 K+ V. z- ]6 ~+ y我唔認為lor- a9 V5 i# F! q- E

- f5 C4 g( ^/ B6 B唔係話要整死佢地
  N3 n7 }* H3 h$ y1 a2 N% [, z5 k2 R5 g5 _3 G2 t
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
6 E" A, C# C+ O9 b* @: _& I0 P! u2 W4 e% ?9 u
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大5 \6 n, [- ~- Y0 I; e
5 n. I1 @3 M) X9 q% I" h
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的5 t/ i. B) W# x# |

' ?- r- s4 [* b- s& S唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由# B/ Y& ]5 s. B4 e' V1 M
& v% ^- S. b8 j+ Q7 k1 F
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) E$ k$ w7 d( f9 ]9 Z/ i
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"* g! H6 q  s" `$ p

8 U8 C' f- i0 f3 Z" T# N, l  p3 d我們的大學生
6 [2 B/ G$ i& e& R$ s+ ?6 s( t' R2 O: o" _" N8 o0 d$ s7 t

+ f7 _8 o. [& W" }% \# L% Q3 u% T; z# C1 i, m

- k. P9 e* e, ?/ J

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
4 J' a1 k7 [+ W$ m/ D/ Q) @6 z) p3 T
+ T# l% n( [* h+ ~( j, }6 B1 T
有見地 !!!! Q' \+ a. d. A% S- }/ E& b* u
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# J  K. T; D* m9 m, @0 Y( P

- k7 |! d1 \# e% ^: j' n0 ZI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
' K& F, n( v% b9 g/ Q/ _3 tI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
& j5 \% N9 [% E: yI pretty sad that about the University official.# P" \+ k9 H& |, t6 z) H
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
- b" `& T5 X5 O# z- n' b- \: [9 [+ C$ i7 J6 D% z. j8 x( j* R
[ 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:% l  H; J  E! l0 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. g. l- U8 X! H( z0 z8 O

0 @7 Q5 x' k+ U% e8 z% ~3 p9 z1 U[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

1 w( S' z1 M6 x6 s1 V0 Q1 R6 L

4 P6 E) T  \$ k0 B! a! Z兩者有何分別?
. G% ?/ x2 G( Z中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?