奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:3 p+ t- k5 {; p' \5 w
6 e/ [# l: }6 R+ _0 W
agree,
6 d4 E  J1 b( a( O/ w我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,: ^$ ?. |: K" F  N
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
7 j( d0 K! C. ?$ X期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

9 W9 t% @# q, o, ^! `
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html" G6 T8 P. |( e4 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
8 k1 S* Q' G) E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.
- x$ A; P( s7 r  B- PJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
9 ^5 l/ {$ h$ o) A" _8 m有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 0 X, P; Y% h: b! `8 r
( b- D) v! J, Y0 ?
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???% J+ g7 a( y& r1 {4 C- I  i

% [% `% C( a/ i. B$ C5 \* g2 K為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

; K6 `- I$ y+ c- v3 g; J4 U
* i- m7 j; F; C* M2 w+ [( ?
絕對支持啦( y5 c/ L2 S5 w8 H4 A
( e6 Z6 u1 O0 n" l+ O* p
有錯就認,打就企定
7 g: k3 C6 q7 Z" L$ J6 G$ ~: U$ N3 T" f; X. s0 }! p* a6 |
無錯當然要撐到底' e. \( e" j) d. V+ I4 i( [
! k* `* o' W9 L7 a. S8 q. l* k
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
" O) n8 W$ t5 t1 o0 B! t+ g5 o8 a4 P2 l
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
0 B  j- {# M: w( e! `- Y+ s- [, D: E' v4 Q; S
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
! q3 j" }6 n. C- \5 F, \
- A  I3 s( L8 e1 ?. a0 ?0 O我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生9 z. h: p- t6 f# }/ x  P

9 h' S- V6 Z# F1 i4 e' H唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?, c2 ^' g/ A! t) b) G" [2 s
$ X7 B% G$ D! r0 ~
我唔認為lor
% g+ I0 L5 B; h) _# H! I  W7 T( Q4 P) P
唔係話要整死佢地
: v- M" ]9 r8 z' Z5 T, ~% H2 G9 d; p) Y  X' j; X/ e- F
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
4 M: `; P- X& n; X6 u7 U
+ [/ {* Z3 p4 H3 Y我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
( J& ~; s. W! c% V6 i% `; }' }# {4 d
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的  O  B! B5 r2 O
$ \# `9 ^$ T" s. c
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
, Z! }. s2 F" z8 V3 F8 Q
' q! ]- b. E/ T% E* ~$ |, R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
  M8 F3 I* _  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"5 ~/ h# {# N! {3 `4 t  K% w" _

. o+ G; w3 k! e+ T% W4 z我們的大學生( C4 z# i$ g, a* g/ E' t6 M3 f
8 P$ f/ C5 ^. g9 Z% a: m

8 S( _* J4 a3 R9 @1 s; Y: _1 d/ `2 ~$ n0 A) J5 J
; S" A& ~6 c' Y* v/ O

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:# G. L) D# g2 B8 Z1 b( x: N8 e

, b* v2 Y) P; O9 U- y, e2 m' P- T& a
有見地 !!!
0 H3 V1 t+ `  F* G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
/ q, m2 ]* u; @5 m' Q/ J- t! `! e! x; P; d7 m
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. . d- h* m* e0 }0 [
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
4 c8 O, n- ?9 R3 H% J7 L, k/ ^+ `+ }I pretty sad that about the University official.
* e, n5 \! E3 \1 z5 C' O. T% UIt'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) B4 \& Z- L9 J+ l4 B) M7 I

+ t, o! j- u0 {/ 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:
1 z/ h, B8 t+ g" M' C4 ~9 k" b- a* ]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 \+ @3 W* O/ `/ U+ R  z' z5 \8 r+ T# ?& |  s) L
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

0 t0 w1 K3 B( ^: N# `* E6 n

! x& J8 b- X$ g" G7 G5 [, b兩者有何分別?
5 A. M1 b4 R3 ~7 g/ h$ U, X# }: q中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?