奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:6 Q6 Y1 s  a" V
. t$ D- H( ^+ ^" c
agree,  E/ a' F8 T" H
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
% ?# g; n0 {3 B  s( z1 z" D/ n但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,# ~  I: X8 i7 c( g
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

" L6 W0 h& v: @0 H; xhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html3 h  g' d) ?0 i
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
8 P0 z" v9 q, m& J/ l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.
5 {' u3 B9 t6 p: q0 W- pJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
% E$ b: j. J' y0 o" s( t有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ * C' ], G( F- h. z& `) K4 E* J
3 n( u" N6 I: z/ e8 ~( E9 K
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???- Q$ j, M' k- n* W: J
/ ?9 h. H9 i3 W" q
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

( G* c$ j, v1 a2 y2 p1 B0 F7 K; N$ |$ w+ T. u4 E
絕對支持啦2 d5 q% o! z6 i- ~

% D& r# q% P, J0 k) b. [7 A有錯就認,打就企定
' T/ _9 ~( ~+ }; D1 x1 l- D/ \& W$ O( ^$ i4 X0 F& q4 E/ u9 v
無錯當然要撐到底
, a3 k3 l) U  R$ ~* y4 v# L
2 N4 q( h2 G8 g但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
. ?" B: v( k' ~. E4 W/ |8 x! D, R& m" W6 p5 m
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
3 ^" R% Z/ M, x- z3 _) d# o, e% _. n& p. Z( u4 R" c3 Z
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
  E0 w( j  g8 B3 d- ~0 }+ {- p6 J, Q6 F* B- M* \3 O
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生9 i: ?- J/ l1 j8 ^6 W" r
! D+ z% {5 l! d4 g2 v. o' d
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?3 \3 c6 H* X7 [8 J; x

: ]) O$ ~1 Z2 @/ x3 ]我唔認為lor5 N! S6 X- M0 z7 @" W

2 B  N9 k6 D- e! S1 L唔係話要整死佢地& R  W" |2 `$ I0 e$ L7 _0 a" ~3 p

( Q1 U6 N, `: a. u& s$ N- j而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
/ T. [$ l. G/ a4 f; y. J! i, v$ ~/ u
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大) v% F9 F& l7 \# A( b
- J" v/ D! _  S1 b3 T$ W+ s% N
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
8 r  i" ~- u- K# h1 U7 B
7 `9 Q. l. _1 o, m2 r3 h' E唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
% X% e- C0 d- K& Z+ w8 s' v  Q+ l% L! `6 {1 m4 Z
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/ O4 e! b4 |. B
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"/ `+ L5 N' T- @  ^5 o: H; g

6 x& |7 v2 r  I; q  }我們的大學生
' d( s# d$ v. J% p9 V- ?' J) b6 r9 }
" {4 P8 F/ r  M' k$ x8 H' f; y
7 g# d( f; Y0 }1 p* c
" {( y! }9 M  x( B. Q0 F; ]. p- G

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:# z$ T1 w* g. W

* D& F6 l  U5 G: V4 G" x  y/ E7 X4 k/ [6 X' ]( n' D$ C
有見地 !!!
0 j/ K/ u6 D& a; h- U$ \5 ?3 G/ Q$ O/ J( 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.html2 n7 p* u8 z$ q) s& Z
; Y; ~# Z& S1 F6 u
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
8 s! m. k& A; t( }+ g6 G/ _: U8 ^$ F9 MI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 1 _( ?! j8 j$ R" Z
I pretty sad that about the University official.7 [3 @& A( `9 Y" {+ G
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
+ }( B6 U+ {5 Z- _2 W2 o
& m# W, d. B8 n6 [/ u  B[ 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:
# |0 D  o: z; ]0 i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 G% R3 B3 z# D
- `& D& |+ D1 b[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

; w" k. t3 q6 M  M' [  D
5 d& H7 s7 l0 q8 M' d兩者有何分別?) o$ w1 `1 ~, W
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?