奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:5 q8 e9 C. u+ Z. s
4 t, b% c6 X! A, c2 B4 h
agree,
5 W8 P$ J; ?1 M( ]6 N" L1 m9 c我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,: `* |! H. S0 c/ J& F  ]
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,' J% L% z! E" k5 q' @
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

8 b  W8 F4 V% q8 o
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
5 R& m% l# ~$ \2 q& 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$ M, c8 l) d( p, n1 l7 C+ `
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.
, }3 E# C2 e  @* U! s' `Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
  w, C( `8 V2 u- s有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
; E$ f6 A; [! t. {' J
9 g! h# q# _1 B- i$ j9 s係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???$ c: l4 z$ @) C) J8 j
0 m( w, P/ h+ x! d( e" Z/ ~# N# x
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

- S7 G8 V2 D  t  g: [- U
% ~2 |. O3 I* q- U絕對支持啦
0 n2 d) y& u3 z5 o9 I3 S  Y& I) V5 e$ x# {  H; f1 t
有錯就認,打就企定- q$ M$ T' J! |, c! W# l

, E1 t& o7 Q: n+ i; b無錯當然要撐到底
0 f' D+ T( g- t/ Y8 u8 Q! i+ @' n' L9 J9 F5 r4 d) d
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩  \: E6 o2 V$ Z6 u& G8 x

# t; {% O# q& g; R( N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, g( [, l: @9 B% v1 z

6 }) L  o; K3 H0 c4 x5 A( }一份公眾讀物係好有影響力, r# |# u- B* j$ K' I( {$ H
# i$ [, L& A% o* O% t6 X
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生; h6 M2 K; Y- t8 E

" ^2 a% f# J7 b4 m5 k唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
8 ]) B8 Q; z# p; K; J0 c  u
  Q+ C$ K4 S8 |1 p) |* }我唔認為lor! W& ]; ]! ^9 X
" F8 \! i4 C- U5 d8 S6 t
唔係話要整死佢地
9 ?9 k# G. I! z* S: y1 |' B+ ^0 t7 T$ D# n! P. m% e
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
! a4 E1 f+ n. t+ I7 f# V" v' R3 @) W
7 m* j4 R& n, Y+ j, X( Y4 {我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大" @& M& g" n8 t

+ Q9 f/ S4 o4 Q% t2 t有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的7 N/ Q' J& y$ ?( q

6 A8 X* E& h5 ~) @' S; N9 y唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
6 |( m# L2 m6 K5 E# Y6 l1 I
/ Q& L/ K) q3 b/ r( p6 L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: u( |, K' V" F/ D$ q$ i. g1 U
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
% k; v& J5 b* W  {% u/ w
* Q8 J3 v" Y) q5 d. }% ^2 b  H$ R我們的大學生
5 e3 K$ M+ L1 X$ u' i  ^1 ^( u$ A- w1 b. H# q* D
+ Y+ X% I$ ^7 i+ J0 D! p7 J3 l  l$ c2 V, n

9 j$ z4 {  `+ ^6 h7 K" D
/ y4 o& y" ~( K* X! w

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
6 V9 M- w1 l- d8 y7 S7 |" a7 p$ c$ z/ ?% I4 B- Z

5 {0 B* {9 e3 F  [! T4 S" c有見地 !!!
; Q5 _: i1 k1 w  @0 L4 b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
0 c" [1 H$ h# V4 Y  c! D
  v: I" B' b1 w0 X0 VI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
  `+ E! P; {, e- F8 CI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. & R6 S$ `8 I. f1 g2 D
I pretty sad that about the University official.
2 C1 S' ~$ o9 \1 T6 eIt'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 [8 x% k" n/ E3 r# [7 J) A
2 ?  Z1 n  s- i% b/ n& [+ o[ 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 17:24:6 U0 C/ V+ E2 a2 o
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 la9 v; @; D/ e3 t; B9 d
# P( h$ H4 n$ U; x( \: W0 U# W* d
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

8 F  A$ f. M% i. b

/ v! L4 `+ i" f兩者有何分別?
" x% ?0 J. i- j" M8 p中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?