奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:7 n  ?. E+ v& D0 H( N) [
, M! P8 v, T) m: j/ j
agree,
+ ~( E3 Z* u$ z1 S/ g" O# T我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,) X/ S8 [8 C. d- K
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,' \: M+ V$ n! I# g1 i5 Z: d7 V- A7 v
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 j3 v  O- _+ b5 E+ jhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
, s/ x: _6 E* J7 u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
* R$ [7 ^/ Z" C9 x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.
% ]# d4 d) {& z9 U! s1 }: P( eJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
: c2 e/ |. e  Y; C有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
; C1 `! l9 }) W/ {
! N+ N" u: x; o! }! c6 h係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???. {/ P( k  m& X% S

, H; x. @3 O" ^1 v/ i, Y, o為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 ^# N6 N- J8 d+ m/ p- M
6 n. G" b' e7 _+ N, j( @1 ?絕對支持啦  j$ E+ B) W3 v
2 h6 i6 f$ C7 M& ~3 g
有錯就認,打就企定
  G6 m% n* a3 p) D  N) n4 C$ E9 M/ u$ s- l4 w
無錯當然要撐到底
1 h9 K4 @# R7 g# X8 Q9 F* U% [6 e) q0 B& f+ m
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩& E4 K( S2 {5 Y7 w0 q

) s. u5 ]! {3 J5 }2 H% U5 a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& o) I' j5 s) w' L. ]7 L+ P' q7 _3 h
% b- C; Y2 x5 i# _! \8 q  u
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
6 S8 J5 D) R- U; d5 \/ f& h, \7 O: l0 E) m0 J& j( d( @6 |
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
7 e& b: P9 ^% `* z; ^) \7 I5 U. ~/ {" s# K( E; R2 m6 f. r) w
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?& q! n9 i' a! W4 P

7 y/ {3 A1 e3 c) t5 t% Y7 D/ Y我唔認為lor# `3 v6 @( z# I' u

; [, l  L! m4 Y* y: H8 \( d唔係話要整死佢地
* b  p: H# \- E' f
! R* o4 R+ J8 q/ v而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用/ }# y5 Q& G8 @1 I

% x9 H' n  K3 ^/ N8 D% _6 e, W我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
5 Y/ V4 R4 H) S" @) o6 q& C& l7 R; B0 o8 i( J2 |  G& `# K
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的0 U, N$ P3 }" B0 k8 q! A

2 Z' u* l7 t' P% i6 N+ g唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
2 _/ P/ K- ?) v% n/ w( `
, @  W- Q! F% A0 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
* k$ Z% P( C( t( E- ?& \7 d; M  P"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
+ p4 H) B: O2 U6 P' e. C, o' q
6 `( a0 Q2 R! t  S5 o我們的大學生7 M- w3 ]1 b, L. k
3 k, A; L: b/ D. q3 q5 r, N

, V7 b( d% X4 w1 v8 H2 Z4 _7 S6 b! K* I& D

# K' y$ z, _( a2 ^# W7 g

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:( g/ V5 ~- u7 D. c2 g# x

& e) y% z" e  i9 h9 B3 o, a9 B9 ~" p8 Y: F0 w4 ?" V& d7 r" F
有見地 !!!
* ]- M5 ?8 u! q% _: Q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; n* d/ ^7 S6 X; M) s# x$ z# i

4 E% w' {" }" W/ R. rI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. ; {1 `0 r, O5 T
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. / L7 ?8 b9 b& u- U! S4 E
I pretty sad that about the University official.
2 B$ v) h( H! X! VIt'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$ Z3 o+ e4 t/ u; N( C$ h# Z, O
6 l2 F) X7 f9 f
[ 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:* u- D& z3 g0 ~6 {+ D. r( F
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
/ k' T% x! }- @; x( K# e5 u$ \
! H, @" k' `6 m- e. p: t[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 @6 k! O, e7 g% k( c2 @; J: s/ S2 X0 t# `8 g& h
兩者有何分別?9 E/ _* o2 Z9 [1 P2 A% `: f
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?