奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
2 t1 ^( y0 ]8 c, t0 Q
: x5 u3 @$ M6 S1 M+ Y' Jagree,
3 l2 ]5 q. y, P3 \3 g我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
, r7 ~4 @2 S$ \! n  \" x但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,# E$ x; w0 N  {( C  D
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

4 Q% Q' o! {( ~/ ]7 G3 ghttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
6 P5 c; r- u, N; P9 b0 J1 ^  e: ~2 Q3 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
$ d4 e; C+ D" g' v( q/ C; ?; B$ o5 M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.$ u+ k3 c' {. m( ~3 ?
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:9 G' c$ O& h* i. q
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
, q* o0 ~) ~, ^& ~; k4 O7 C  D7 a3 T$ b# `! [9 _% E* s
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
+ ~; w8 \2 J! `7 J. h5 w; c2 X2 I2 x) `' J+ n9 ]
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

; L5 n0 n# H% B/ d0 Z

/ g" x9 ]5 g8 a7 U- n  s絕對支持啦6 }3 {9 S9 q" B# I6 O  i
0 {' p& E" |1 q# b1 d
有錯就認,打就企定
+ X; ~( F* Y6 H& c2 o- ^
5 O4 b* y8 x( Y- {6 N$ {3 l無錯當然要撐到底, h. W% u7 p6 `9 x' S

7 C' {. A3 U0 m2 d1 {但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩0 L' @, A' I2 b2 `
: P/ Z0 h% g  C4 a" m( h  T# A
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
& L; i, O; U! ?. ?& W' z  O7 D4 M
$ U( m& e1 o" ?) g! K一份公眾讀物係好有影響力8 ]& {6 e; L  ]' }4 x. a& i3 ~

1 k9 Y- B6 E1 l/ |) E我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
( `: f# _: i& _* T- ?3 Y, c2 q  Y& W# o2 Y( Z' x; \1 M7 |
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?/ b- S( H! b0 @
3 _# z% ^3 k$ F* t9 U* k; B4 _) p" N
我唔認為lor5 A: R" W: B0 ?

* n' t0 x, S4 I/ g& O' R唔係話要整死佢地
. y# V, x% e8 a/ V" W
5 V% ]4 s8 ^* `( G+ R& k# R而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用. c2 v; {  ]1 ]
% ~9 a# h2 c. q8 B, d! j, L
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
( i% ?& E5 j, x2 i7 ]) E: x8 _; H# g% f* o6 z
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的6 G/ x4 N  W$ W$ O* J

" C3 e# P! A, N; M& K唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由& ^9 j  a  ]7 P- l& C- O8 g; q+ o
! I/ U% J5 N1 @7 `( Z7 C# J
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
9 W% W, m( _) X" p$ Z& L"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"8 q/ w2 Z, q: O& G/ b* v/ M. v
. \9 G) R; P0 g& `9 ]) j% a
我們的大學生* ]8 Q# c3 n8 Y% V/ p  E" i

! k3 V. `( i5 h: [- q2 G; R6 a& w3 T' E  B/ S0 m5 Z

; O) S( |" e# z3 ~# Z
$ J% n) V% ^4 y$ K. \- ^9 h

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
% T* _& E. u: g; r( a
4 d; X4 M% h4 W  m
4 X. i# S# N% t2 B% H+ s; P* U5 ~+ v有見地 !!!
8 s% i% j- j1 y3 }6 V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
- N) }& J) U5 u: v1 W5 X; T( U' ]7 L, e! j( n! s9 z
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
: ]4 d# j" C; ~I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
7 A: U" |2 H" A7 AI pretty sad that about the University official.
( _  Z$ w  v' ]5 o6 zIt'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
1 T, }3 o4 T3 i) Q
& C2 L$ B* p+ J2 c8 s[ 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:
/ g! w: [, Q% y7 c7 l4 p( }( w1 l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
, |7 C1 M: f# V, b7 |$ T  f) l
& b' u" C4 b/ p: |6 j% X[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

6 Y( m2 H5 A, y1 u6 S5 `& ]' J' x" P. Q  B5 ]7 a
兩者有何分別?/ @" p, ]4 F: `& Z: {0 n3 y) _
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?