奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:% ^& @$ F1 x" K; y. F7 g- b  v7 _( Q

- ?. u- r6 F3 W6 ]  b- K4 Xagree,
. i; `5 h8 f/ n+ l$ Y$ p我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,% d1 C) b3 S! u' @4 g' T" B  ]% @! a
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,; `: _; \' h; b9 Q7 l0 d' D; N0 k
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

9 @! `* N# Z& F* v7 T
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
6 W4 r& O% N1 D5 m4 P& J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
9 N/ E/ N: U$ o3 v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.2 e9 J6 I5 U% B/ z
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:9 x2 V7 }( H$ F1 J3 P: T
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
0 X3 F( {+ p$ V. \( s: G- p/ C* m' ~# U2 z
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???& [  n% Q- ]! W, W
- A6 c1 [; Y( \' [$ Q& h
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

1 w% O, E9 y2 \$ b1 Z( Z5 D- j1 S3 ]( g( {6 `: z1 D
絕對支持啦9 y* N# A$ B6 J4 X
0 H: M2 B* D/ d$ q& {6 Z, q1 t6 }6 B
有錯就認,打就企定/ L+ w/ t, u# q" B  O* V

  i# i, O2 L1 I# F, ~無錯當然要撐到底3 G* L9 l* A- v$ y
+ T0 v, ~7 ~5 \( z
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩! T0 s8 E! D' y! G3 ^

& ~* M' Z3 @. X4 P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  l; g: t* ~$ o& O8 E* q
& x; V6 `! v1 o8 Q- ?一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
/ I8 ^5 D' r/ W7 a) i3 O% L9 x% [' G" c8 ?7 ~
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
# a* o6 C7 W: w, c# l  R: u* c
5 @- z, ]% Y4 u2 H9 u+ w) F唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
) X0 ~& {; ~  D3 |* ~6 k' I' N% Y$ U) E# p8 o; S
我唔認為lor: M2 {3 W! W( n, W. n% @
7 @: h! y! r4 j, W; l4 G
唔係話要整死佢地
& l/ p9 U9 D; C8 c7 q' ~- f" ?+ U, ]2 ?9 M
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
" N4 N2 q" {! }9 p: h  @% ^; j# E$ d. L
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
% b5 {9 F7 q! f( J4 X# X7 M9 G, X/ d4 ?7 K$ x6 G
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的9 @5 E4 L' o" U1 K% y% C

- @$ M9 x, c0 o唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
+ y7 x% [  H6 t- o% U7 L6 _; N. D2 u
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 v! c+ z  B8 i" s- c5 @
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"$ a' c" ^; ^. D3 Z0 K0 ~
# ?; K- r  \( C: U
我們的大學生+ ?: _: `: ?' ?' O; Q

3 R) i" S$ `3 x. C3 `4 Z
$ Q! C: M& F8 k0 I' J' Q  J" b1 u" Z
$ N- T# D/ G. h' a" T/ A' }

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
6 ]6 e# m; P* ~7 T) h. s0 ^( h
2 B# L8 l6 {# Q- |
' K& I0 X2 }' \" s8 }) k. W有見地 !!!
  I2 K& ]" N  {8 I% F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. E$ V! q8 w8 b
- s$ y! i5 w/ W
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. + ]- P2 O4 ~8 s; F) 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.
: [; @" \: g, w( R5 ?I pretty sad that about the University official., s2 s7 @( k4 ^
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 la0 g' S+ d. h/ U( c4 R

/ h3 a7 E' G  ?[ 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:
. [; _, o0 V  [' f0 x; F1 l+ j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
8 f' q2 B3 c* B$ h# y9 U! x# ~3 ?# h! R% ]
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

* W$ N  B3 C/ j) l$ Q1 m; w! }
, o2 T, i$ p" X5 h兩者有何分別?
0 N5 e& s1 ?/ K4 e, o) }中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?