奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:) ^+ y7 s, K8 m' B2 E% {0 v

) b9 p  {4 w& q' D/ @agree,6 `$ w- \9 W2 d: z( U: G- t& s
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
- z' v5 g9 F" z, T4 u但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
4 Q% Y9 b. @: @; ?: X期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

1 ]+ `+ z7 \; _- @http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
5 \  [. H# D0 B6 o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2 E0 T1 n2 `8 C: }0 m8 M1 }6 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.
! [: P, o4 e/ I3 Q8 ^Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
" p# X3 Q& ~6 n- |有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
3 l4 h5 z5 y6 O! ?& Y  Y4 d! T$ F8 \
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???1 O# [. c: O6 z
5 X6 N3 |2 B/ S! U' t; f& ~
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

* C7 B0 y3 L; m  q- ?: l+ i( m" q; _
絕對支持啦
7 z! p3 f, {+ l$ `0 x1 w5 R1 N0 u6 ^! i% i# G1 l7 D1 K
有錯就認,打就企定. s; L0 {0 B7 g1 d) K

( L6 ~* S* q8 d" S$ Q8 n2 I無錯當然要撐到底
; S  j- X/ d0 L/ d. C' }% A6 W7 D3 M& e- X( ]' A" i
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
0 Z/ a% h3 s( y: T- [* y/ T" v' R0 H' z+ E
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9 M1 T+ v4 t0 D2 a, f" V
3 w5 S. E7 x2 G- D' b
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力: Z' O/ D7 L7 I1 F. r

$ m3 k# o3 L$ B我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
! c9 A% {- J7 j. a: P, O8 N$ t7 e. G$ t; n  P# O  o
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?) D/ P3 t# o+ ], O6 x7 ~
, c8 S9 w* g% d6 {1 @4 K
我唔認為lor. o/ b: y% r. ~9 @, N  i
! I3 A0 X. q4 h" _3 n1 M* `
唔係話要整死佢地3 Z, i- K5 a& O

; r1 u2 K) f8 ?: J8 T而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
4 M4 x9 q- p# h8 c
1 L* T0 ^5 R% p  e# n; L" |我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
" x9 F6 [" L9 T1 _% V0 F) y8 y6 L4 c9 [" P+ s& h- A5 m! U) B
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
8 o, L8 J- C+ U- K+ K) G. l4 o8 C0 V2 y1 s
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
1 j( o; D& y& `  L- D$ d/ D
: y# B$ [. S0 K1 g0 ?6 e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
4 n/ w" h  Y. m/ \5 L: a2 p5 B7 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"
% N7 [6 D  _* H% j
: b" G3 n3 v, u& w) I' v! n我們的大學生
7 n' L2 B9 Q* J  E
3 C" U7 x  {  v6 J8 }  S9 F4 D5 l& z# l( B' Y$ s. x0 b7 E

" G6 {4 G. z8 b' ?
% J7 q  U; s& ?$ h! b- y" w+ L

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:0 Q. r2 U2 U" V" u7 @5 E  W/ l

8 z! a: h- H% E$ H9 ]" n! K% D7 v
8 n) B! u3 H  G6 k- Z有見地 !!!2 ~1 k' x2 l4 h* X' \5 ~
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
& ^5 }& \# g/ `( O2 g4 O7 t& c9 D
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 7 S" v1 S' j' P7 M' K; q6 ~
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
* M$ ?2 e8 E* ~; b5 qI pretty sad that about the University official.% K' w* r& T0 b% o! z5 ]
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
! p& A# g+ g: K* F% ?* o* J9 S" U5 ^8 X
[ 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:, y9 r( Y$ C: Q( q' Y
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
! L3 `' N, w% M9 ]0 H  `6 R5 M1 ~2 y- U, p( \8 ~( I% R
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

( L2 r' Z  q: |! g5 C: V# `
0 r8 @* _% r4 X  p  o
兩者有何分別?) ], b1 Y  j, y
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?