奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:' e( g- i1 e, d$ h8 h, {
/ H( g, t1 H# Z
agree,# T4 a2 C* o9 B9 R' j
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,* v$ d$ C& R8 r: B/ q, v
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
+ x$ L0 f, W7 d8 q8 [) M2 Q期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 y9 _  P5 M* |http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html0 O$ ], ?, r9 K9 s; A+ `: C& F  F
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
/ j& i, s/ q5 p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.
& P) Y9 b( j4 [' Y0 S* q2 IJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
3 O) E( e2 x, R9 X( z& C有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ # d$ g! I, w8 Y& j

  w$ G# E6 t! Q' o7 o; V8 T係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
: i9 t6 H; J$ J( r) y
; r1 p* z. A- q4 X* p為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

" T8 z  N: S3 W3 w

9 q# W+ K. Y) K. R! J, y% c3 A  A絕對支持啦
6 ^( X& F$ ~9 k6 q# ~5 z4 J& y+ o% f& l! K3 i8 [
有錯就認,打就企定2 @8 F* D2 X8 Y- `

  W/ `, l& i, H2 t5 A  k4 ^) q無錯當然要撐到底
" q1 l" ]* m+ d, g$ K( o2 P1 @2 B) A
6 d% b9 M9 P- m0 Q# M但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩) h. {+ k. Y- Y" x; e
& F* f" C8 w; K/ a& x
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 N, p; t" V& j+ E9 ?) w
& m" |) U% U! f. }. |9 i( _3 `. |
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力- W9 w% ]( Y- M; _! K% Q

% {: G  w$ z* v. g+ |, y4 ~% \. H+ i我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生5 y. {6 A# R( ^" c

/ V; g9 j: o$ c2 o: V4 i唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
# G) r* f- N* w
" J4 l5 S% |4 H6 x% j我唔認為lor
, @3 V. Z* X3 g5 U  ~! @: g
. u: `; V. A% Y1 S4 w7 E. J5 V唔係話要整死佢地1 O" j4 K, A7 R
% D: H2 i6 y2 s+ b3 W3 ]
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
8 [; T% z' M$ X) p: \0 C9 i1 k& ]* r" M: b
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
, G# Q& ?* g+ K$ c4 k* @( G* G0 j. Y
; S3 s% {' P. V& t1 t# V有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的7 R) j/ I& g. \: s

% W( I2 K, x+ i0 Q, F) h' E唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由7 T, {0 ?8 N. _0 M" @. d

! h% ^0 u; p; y/ U; N, y+ W  U) @# Q( U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5 U7 f6 A& @- e) 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"
8 r9 [/ T6 ^" `9 ^& v  g1 a
, j9 a8 i+ u3 X0 G% R我們的大學生
. i( m0 d3 m. r) ~
7 w* `9 h) i1 I( e+ C9 ~
; j$ @- @9 ?4 ^/ @& }! z/ Z
0 `$ _. M' f' |7 }" l2 ]; v
, U  y) I3 q0 z/ Z; G7 Q) @

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:3 u( ^( T5 J$ _" y+ V4 h& N  [

* @1 r% T: t% W& {
" `7 g2 T& T# H( R+ K有見地 !!!
4 P$ V# `$ W6 `1 Q! \, h" f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
( v3 C2 ~1 B3 I; _- k' J$ L
* s4 K' r& o$ A9 G- @1 t+ d; ^I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
; K8 w; d# M6 U$ L6 ^, XI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
( G% w- S% E7 r1 z- c  {7 mI pretty sad that about the University official.; U' j4 w1 ?/ i8 e1 r1 y% A% J" H
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/ ^- B1 _* `$ ^1 w1 |. t" R5 B* l

7 b, h9 k8 {1 j9 V9 D7 m[ 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 S9 P9 N% T9 n/ }9 H/ r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
. [' Q7 W6 v0 m" v- X- {
1 e, Z* Z5 \- x2 D4 j[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

$ k$ q5 D& M: f9 P' g2 c  r
) Q) A) Q0 K' J6 N3 z/ s9 @
兩者有何分別?
7 f- {9 S0 y; K  a( H8 ]7 i" E& {. {中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?