奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
; @# p0 I7 ?" I$ V! V; h, h; c% E$ P- c% V! g8 q
agree,+ d0 Q( |# A0 }
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,! f4 t8 W# `+ m$ d9 e
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
% Z0 @6 `& t  W) y期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

) ?- h0 z! f9 x* f; c& A/ x
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html& V. m* w& c+ N  S: \
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
$ k% ?( S- C' y1 _: a$ y& q* G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.8 J1 W$ T' e! f, ]7 `
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:' H- |$ l$ ?6 S& u2 p
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
1 W. [) S" V. D' q1 @) I; _, [# h! f' N
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
0 d% {  i% [" f2 C1 ~
0 y6 q/ ^9 J1 X為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

: D, C0 S0 S2 Z4 ]- [7 m" e, x* x
5 G2 ]: @; p7 t. I
絕對支持啦
7 F% a3 }; _4 D: A, W3 R) T
; r2 n* S8 D) }8 h, @有錯就認,打就企定
: \  Z: `. ]. w/ F  A! W
) h0 @% _' q' }: z無錯當然要撐到底
" m1 Z) l' c! a& J, R( C( m; @# G0 [- H/ `6 ?
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
% F* R. \) b, Q% r1 J& ^) P9 M5 O* F2 _& k! H# \
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
+ |4 E/ z  [- Z  A% G7 t3 F  a9 N6 Z6 d( \& L! R$ }" v
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力5 q7 j7 n0 N+ W" u
: h; l; p5 V4 ~; v* \% S, O4 d
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
! g. O: @8 D! e4 h' m  F0 b- A" D) m9 n1 U" ^" G0 A+ `
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
- T2 x# O* Z. Y2 K( c5 L7 p$ K! ?7 Q" k4 q# {
我唔認為lor
, f# y  e" j+ ]+ \( g. |# W' d; z# f" ^0 C0 a! S1 f4 C! H
唔係話要整死佢地
3 b# a9 v0 M$ G% ^+ K- D* b. k9 J
& q. H6 A6 P, ^而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
7 j$ o# Q5 T9 Y% V7 U* H  V3 t( G* m$ q/ H5 y
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
7 b+ N2 I' b0 Y" u, g+ _* p& i6 z3 l# @7 v8 S5 ?
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
( x* {( v5 ^- Y+ M2 O( |7 f8 K
* Y+ w& K5 G6 {' Q5 v- T5 }. ]& U/ W/ p" U唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由( |1 q/ x' d; d9 Y( G# d6 {" K/ N! k
$ F1 s* B. l5 W: m2 V
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
2 K2 e& z8 F1 u+ G6 Y"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"$ n9 s) O: n, ~$ f

5 y1 [) W# N6 J2 Q我們的大學生
6 O) W. E+ n; l0 L- h& R  V+ @3 u% [& [, K
% w1 o5 k8 o5 P1 A7 ~+ p

4 r( j( K( C* s6 n& R
. @0 N: J1 a# a' [1 i0 Z& H4 n1 d

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
, [' t) v* k. R- m& e$ O
& \  f& ^# p3 a. A2 U8 z! {& j1 @: V& O- w# g0 U8 Z
有見地 !!!
8 H5 L5 M1 o* o0 h  a' s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# {# D2 D$ Z: U# l0 z" k
, ^. d4 q2 n% s% v- t
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
+ T3 c1 [0 B- _% bI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
& L" L% x! |4 u+ l7 K4 p( T6 K! ?: RI pretty sad that about the University official.
2 j  c9 e, e5 x0 f3 P4 p# O7 {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
2 {# A+ {1 ^( Z' c: H8 u; z
' ~! J$ _3 @! J: Z[ 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 17:24:5 |( ^1 c9 P* C+ 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
, Y2 |1 w2 V" b7 z; v( Y; N% O; f
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" w  D$ i: G# k6 W! a. a$ \8 Y1 W) J9 N7 e' ?& M! @3 c0 s2 M
兩者有何分別?
: J# f/ u( R  d' w6 f  t# u中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?