奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:9 m) o8 x: d' ~6 G6 f
7 [: o8 I( e/ z  y$ F6 q
agree,
# A0 l$ M1 m8 |8 f! h8 t6 g) r# M" J我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
5 G/ S# ?* g1 L: q2 y# K& J但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
; v7 {4 I/ }  W1 u2 r: H- P! e' _; q期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

; b$ U9 ^( N. Z0 bhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html1 H) j$ I3 h) [
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; U4 |+ f. O7 r5 w+ ^
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.
) |9 s8 O3 h' CJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:" \( M8 M4 T& p3 F3 _+ X
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 4 ^* k/ d$ h2 u. i
! `; f, O- W" `$ r  p0 ?
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???, v2 \7 _9 c- e/ u+ q  t6 ]

) E5 T+ {- C! P' d5 }: B為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

' k# i$ O1 M2 }2 }5 K/ S" U2 B$ I" }! `5 Y- @$ x
絕對支持啦0 j8 P1 a& G' \: {7 W

' i2 S9 D; I) P  x; m5 R有錯就認,打就企定5 z, L3 k) k# \! b
8 ?, h6 n( r% n3 C
無錯當然要撐到底
/ O2 Y$ Q/ s& T% x  i& G' o6 b5 d' `! c6 t  g1 T/ A
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
& Y+ d/ u" e0 R5 T& b  i8 x
% L3 Y3 f5 E! s1 ?+ F5 ]4 q: O, y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, ?+ f6 d  z5 ^& h& M
, k) D6 F& ]2 d$ c( G7 \
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力4 r  C5 i) x, f; C3 x/ Z- W
3 j, k- U( O' ?' a: ?
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生* h$ u; W$ S, I+ S  {8 k" o* r0 Q

+ h# ^! v) d& Y4 _* {! E1 t唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?, |. j: {% J) r
6 P+ G/ K- m! x8 [& h( z; D( x
我唔認為lor
: G) ^! h1 m+ K, Z1 e, @( _9 {% p- ]! @' M
唔係話要整死佢地1 H- x0 ~9 x- u+ S: I$ k& P4 L

+ k0 q0 O, c; _& j8 b" p4 X而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
  d+ x8 v7 S; F/ j- d/ o' ]8 z. |8 p3 L* L/ v# u. Q% Q3 R% ]$ h
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
. Z1 P7 J6 d, y8 _/ U* V! O9 ~  g
$ N) N/ `- `4 _7 g- N2 ?# A9 H- Z有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
; o( I' L: q5 e: ?) H9 u: n
" \. L8 r) `  [+ A/ L唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由$ Y6 W- v8 M( w  n% G
2 o1 F" _+ O0 C2 g+ W
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( w9 j* E$ x3 R$ f
"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 K& `3 b# ], e! w4 Q
+ V3 j3 D0 W: m我們的大學生- |7 \) R2 {4 w$ u# \4 y7 H& o
, }7 `1 A+ B, D
( I% S5 A2 c" w; h; @% Q* L' p& x+ n

7 ?( ]: D: T  W. `
0 v* _- m  \7 P

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:" `4 y6 F3 e2 V3 S" |1 y

0 V# K, [4 K5 _) }
! ~7 A8 `- c2 v, }& b2 ^有見地 !!!
$ @3 o8 {& ~& h  b) L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
/ J% s) Z4 R# w& {7 G7 _* P  w0 a
4 P, U; e1 d+ dI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
# Z' r# W2 D1 i. i/ N8 v4 \I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. & s$ i9 }0 O9 ~0 w9 G
I pretty sad that about the University official.
% U9 E2 a  s+ h2 yIt'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 la1 o5 U& v4 d' W; e0 d

* T3 R; V0 t3 y3 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 17:24:4 `' q1 h- M; M5 r4 ~4 F: y
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
9 ^2 U! F+ y5 L- h9 u+ P- B; K; u9 v4 Z. Q: s% x' _8 [
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

4 `' i7 q) L3 V4 M  t! n- V8 K
5 R$ g; J! z5 ?# F& L% H4 u
兩者有何分別?' ~: u8 a2 o, _. P0 ?, ]
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?