奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:! r+ O& g7 R% [. Z* X8 W' `
* g- f, |8 g' `! i% {( _
agree,4 q- f0 w5 {8 Y& d, l; j7 N
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,' p( T! R' {" \4 U( Q
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,# O* M2 v* q* Q( S0 u9 M+ s* o
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

6 l2 P. a+ x: b: v  ?5 o
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
9 G7 t3 r6 E% H3 l/ Z, [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% r5 z; \' w1 e3 a7 \5 b3 A
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.( T  J( R& Z9 V# R/ ~) V- N
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:4 \( _7 j- O9 B% P. H; [
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ & d& s1 l( w" A0 }: d

/ m! g  \, {. `1 t4 Y係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
5 Q8 j' M# O( x  X% g# o/ A/ J- \- f6 V- n. k7 o
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

) c. N& B; {, ]9 W9 X5 G. T
0 ?0 B$ l! K3 P/ ^4 y. h絕對支持啦) P9 f1 H1 J6 f3 H+ I; c3 f* E1 P# S

  |2 o+ c! a4 D* A有錯就認,打就企定
' Q$ t  x& K# C# x  _: C& B* u  o; L5 G, G4 U
無錯當然要撐到底
; f' G. V) {, m/ A+ A) q5 |" j7 X
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
4 o$ G+ v3 ~0 V; K4 S6 C' F
% u7 ?( e# V, r5 j3 ^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 }5 h: A4 r4 m8 @' x
! C' _; X1 T. s$ |8 s2 R+ N; \
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力2 x7 F& F% d3 y0 x# y

- r- I7 p8 y! l: b7 d/ S1 k我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生8 b) p; b& r7 Y' V) w# |' t# l

5 d) I6 [/ o* ?4 [" C' v3 E唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?+ G3 L: X0 k* O1 X0 x' ~4 C2 D+ {

! U6 ]9 J, o& F! x. v我唔認為lor
& d8 d1 X, J; @8 w4 N) i+ b; q* H5 ?7 n  Z* W8 _
唔係話要整死佢地' _2 s' w  J, J  Q0 y( m! l* E
% B. j; g- y5 z5 s
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用3 R2 d# f! O  [+ K1 e6 Q
" @. N3 X' c2 ]$ K8 h8 l
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大5 X" z: `5 b/ u8 a" ?1 k  t
" S; I- J! h2 ^
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的8 E# v  R& J- c. J/ X0 Y; f

8 L8 f# z& c3 v! H唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由- T. w. o* c7 @- Q3 w3 T4 m2 `
, T( r! j5 |( ~9 q
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
0 s' E( \* r$ ^8 K% z9 m"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
9 L; [9 O/ C# y- o8 N) Z" o3 m3 y# ]$ c/ t+ W- t% F9 x
我們的大學生7 f7 J, P" ^* J2 w" e9 g) t

- t+ a9 K$ [9 b0 @
& p1 I/ U9 p& D3 j( a$ O8 e8 J% x8 t  U
2 y. e- a* Y5 L2 Q2 A8 q
: j! k: d2 {& m" k9 X5 i- q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
; K8 \. J: ~5 B# o9 e, n) x( e8 A# y6 F

3 t. N: Q& p8 T; u" Z有見地 !!!& g, D2 P! v5 B4 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
3 Q: H5 W" G6 ~. ]9 [0 P- Y
3 B1 n2 `" w$ m5 z. I3 m/ U/ eI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
; R$ Z7 u0 E; d* l: I8 {- e0 j+ QI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
5 o! x7 W/ K9 K& l& JI pretty sad that about the University official.( G* T- D! ^' a  [# i% q/ M+ t1 C
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
: c* Z+ |" R4 h
9 c3 h2 S' J0 `% B5 }[ 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:- e4 O  p) H# [  ]1 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) M/ f2 a7 ?/ M

$ M* X% o/ l$ M$ L  q/ q! o! m[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 e# a4 v- c+ z
% \. o3 J5 M- h! p8 I. A
兩者有何分別?
5 i% x% I0 S( z中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?