奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:, T# f% F& [4 R1 S2 G+ @
7 k5 `6 H0 U, U+ s
agree,
4 s3 b# h$ m- E- J我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,$ s8 S* m, y. H1 H
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,4 l! R  b2 a1 F; @8 {" a! O4 e
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

+ Q# U+ C3 S3 ]; N; o4 Whttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html6 @3 ~, K2 R8 W# f  S' O
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
1 M1 k) y9 o6 B: ?( m/ K# [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.1 G  P3 }' c3 I* Q
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:! S) @" d/ c  W3 i
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 5 f7 Y% d0 r4 t- u

) _8 t" H' c$ ]+ x- O; q9 Q係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
: s' ~2 r: i1 D* r  k
& O( P- g) L& |為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

7 A( N* G% ]  N* C) J' b* }: O1 {; y1 e4 N! N( \, T
絕對支持啦
! W* I" v" n+ L! H0 d9 g  @3 b' N& x" D
有錯就認,打就企定
, `3 w# Q% ^9 C+ N* {# J+ F' w2 h
無錯當然要撐到底7 f- a; a$ ]$ s9 n  s9 }! l5 \
% ?& n# ^! `5 ~) ]; n4 W! |
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
& d9 V6 |, y* _
# W/ z& @) d$ H* I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4 p7 X1 ?7 d, M* c# U+ u

' ?  r6 R2 k: [* ^4 Y一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
5 _6 Q* n2 b& U& m' R* E3 w4 c$ o0 f7 f5 s( c
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生' ~/ T) R7 F) s# r8 b

) S( E. j; A& r* W: H5 S唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?7 }( U$ k* u* a% K
8 f9 R* U# }0 u" Y. a
我唔認為lor& o3 [+ e& z' q$ P/ M

8 l  }; @, |  W4 b唔係話要整死佢地' i: P! P3 w, `5 [$ M

- c- y7 o- ^! {7 s' u( g而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用% e6 B& ?8 k) N/ H# B# m8 X
" v' r8 h$ o( L0 [; B2 H: l
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大( p% @1 F) d3 B, b. d4 b

$ v; _) x" s2 x" f有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
5 U+ V; f4 I! O5 y& w) G" M" R
2 b# _' w0 Y1 w% U唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
9 |: K5 {! [5 I( ?! e' ~+ l7 c7 ~9 l8 [9 u/ v: n% }9 s
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# W6 E+ C% ~6 S+ q
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
' E' H9 v" F! r; _
$ ~' M0 q5 c1 k我們的大學生2 f5 I4 q5 O1 w! o2 e  m( h& Z
$ i/ Q1 E, K' e: I

6 `" m$ V5 d  t# m8 W
+ @9 v$ {. K4 B7 j
, A1 ^& t5 A1 r; d- E

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
7 D* u3 t( i* P( f6 W! }0 x! `7 v! S. L

$ o/ K/ P' H+ t( A7 R2 |. y有見地 !!!. Y3 c% [# @& Q6 j1 D$ I
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+ s2 U  e9 ~3 Y$ ?% v. ~

. S0 m# r+ @, j- \3 ZI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
% z1 S/ f6 r8 L1 ^; D- U, OI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 0 B7 |1 O" b6 z' I: f, U
I pretty sad that about the University official.
' i- N, ~8 x! ^; k! L! {/ p, gIt'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
0 F8 r- g7 V: T0 M" x! P/ s# r. M4 s6 D, ]) A' y8 T( d
[ 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 q" _5 D1 @8 U7 ^6 v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
6 x2 ^, J& ?; R( g" t
) @5 c9 X# `- t) ^6 {) m! q' y[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

# y& C6 n9 s( Q/ ~

/ d* A/ H- ^# B: X, H兩者有何分別?
$ r6 ~  K6 N) m& C3 n4 T+ e中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?