奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
; C  Y+ l( P8 W- u  [7 o- I2 a& X1 M, |( A& r+ U8 S! g
agree,
$ {* D- y* p/ m3 f* ~& m我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,# [9 `  M- E. h+ F* R2 T
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,  C+ @% x6 i* c) Z
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

0 L' ~+ Z; O3 Z! [& m) E! w8 o
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
: c9 l2 k  m; s8 S0 |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 R6 o7 H$ N- Q# n+ f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.$ L8 }+ y5 v' E* R- z
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
1 Z9 F7 k' O: J! l# P有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 5 q' q5 h  R8 h# p1 c+ K; _

+ a4 b% g- z* p- U$ C係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???% r3 E, d2 r7 y* U7 x' D) Q

6 S; h2 ~: M$ R: |7 C, u) E& X為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

4 _8 a/ m( B; }
) C) Z9 t/ m9 Q' K6 X- Q1 o" {+ r
絕對支持啦& J* o3 ]# ~3 I  o' B

' y0 O5 N8 S2 r3 T% u有錯就認,打就企定
* Y5 @1 _' _  S" _1 i, @/ o4 d' t+ b
無錯當然要撐到底, {8 ]" \' \! b* m8 O4 r  h1 B
9 ~' @1 @+ P9 l  h( o' `
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
# f; V* b, X9 \9 a! D5 O( a3 |2 j( l' n& W1 d
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1 M' H$ m  q, I7 }
8 u: w# }! f+ ]# d! i5 p) e
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力4 H2 _0 L8 F# R, R" B5 S
6 R7 g& d6 J+ v) ~
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生0 L/ D7 U7 V0 Q7 n3 w. w* k
" P( T" }9 u" w0 n
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
* W- p/ p( |5 j* Y8 k; I; E  S$ s$ w1 Q% O2 P. Q3 W1 F, ]
我唔認為lor9 l8 J2 A  J) w' v8 s
: i1 {# Q+ t( F9 G3 w+ T% q
唔係話要整死佢地
. d" r2 ?5 ?+ R5 t7 B' g* V9 e/ {* x9 S
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用9 |0 `$ r  y4 |) ?+ A0 a9 i  Z
( S1 p) C: U# k' x. ^
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
$ @% U4 S. D8 }# X# \8 b6 p+ e! Q& f* a
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的: L3 R* P  K: ?1 l9 i. ~7 W9 i
/ H' Q2 l8 z* ?; q
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
' o. B) o0 l+ i( |6 ]8 [" Q9 A; u8 U* o; x
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
& b4 i4 N  Z, m9 Y$ t' S2 A+ Z"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"+ F1 T  N3 s0 I& u
1 s' H6 Z: U3 i
我們的大學生
. X# S; c* L0 d( y% [- A3 ]% b
) ]  W) k) K  @$ `7 j$ c1 l5 d8 o' U

: v( M* M6 p  C' s/ v$ e' D# t) t8 t0 K9 O3 u' \/ w1 b; A; @- X7 m

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
  Y/ o/ O+ x: h# J) F% v, J' [; N: S  P& G1 X. S2 k

% W- d% P  \- f8 v  z- Y: d' I有見地 !!!
; C/ ~" z: l( [# }( c4 ~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 `( x( B0 O) p4 X! w: N- V
# m( W9 l+ ^% ^& w: r
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
& ?$ r+ T. Z, i/ x0 t% D+ k6 P$ dI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
( P0 q! K7 `% e. P4 Z: O. f- v0 cI pretty sad that about the University official.
% l$ v, J2 |- C# H0 [- O5 jIt'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. O) G" n7 e) ~" G' K

$ f( u' T; I9 R" u[ 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:
: [7 j0 C" U+ m$ {( z- x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# Z6 H  `+ }' c! M. l% l
! }+ U9 o* Q+ n3 S0 e
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 h4 g% w, C7 N& u& g7 I
3 E! _. o  M/ T( t" U( o9 l3 l: ]# i兩者有何分別?! l' T" @2 v: b+ K3 E8 ]
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?