奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
) G# x7 ?9 S; b
* C+ V% ^# D4 B3 a. ^1 Q5 }agree,
- W' R& |; a) w我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
1 v* X& ?. j, C但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,, ^: m1 n' S' c; H" _4 G' \
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

" X% Y  j2 r9 l. H' ehttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html. A0 p* u! c  M  E0 B. f- y, g
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
/ z1 L0 s5 c. T, 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.
" r. Z" ~5 R7 @* ]Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:  f" ?2 q! |& ]6 l  o) w
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ " N8 o) [0 W+ _5 o$ Y# f. l
4 v, W5 n% ^/ P* ]
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???' e# M  S2 q) V) f' W
) k+ |* P, W& K! m
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

. x9 ~6 _: Y4 E! m5 P

) i  I4 \8 \, T- K7 J. ?) S絕對支持啦# E' P) Z9 w/ h' P  C7 r
0 [! ^/ q. a/ ~5 K' f
有錯就認,打就企定! J$ p/ Z; }8 I, J
  ], [' ]) T% ~
無錯當然要撐到底
* o+ b9 E  I( r+ F
/ S7 V) O# n. Y但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩% y9 M9 f7 H: f1 A

: f  H8 e$ k' p/ z& l9 t/ e! w! B6 O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
1 I) f. Z4 _- X
: j: l7 u" n; A$ T) u一份公眾讀物係好有影響力( n3 ]3 p1 M6 y; q& I
" j4 n$ L; }% L
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
- B$ P$ ^/ ^: ~  v5 Z
4 I  I5 O, S. K. @) i唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?! M! C; E$ S5 S8 x+ _2 K

, y+ W5 ^7 q; {, g我唔認為lor
% k% J0 C' M% Q0 K5 d+ O$ U
4 p7 L& C# e! B) B唔係話要整死佢地9 c- ~/ t% y& H. ~, `0 q/ H! ~" h
: @( o2 E7 Y' ?5 |  b; i0 t
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
" D4 _3 K+ ?" d& q; d
  ]4 y5 }" n! B/ ?5 A我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
' U, h5 E$ }$ W' Q5 z3 M" w/ B8 J
4 F8 l; d! f- k$ X- \有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
' J; N/ h9 U+ e/ i: h
5 w- X# N, p+ [! T: K2 X& R1 e唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
) ~, Z: |, r( E0 a0 i2 i8 O# v  U3 ^' Y# ?) A4 P! {" B
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! r4 ~' |+ p( v
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
# X; x+ J3 p% C; U) I+ G3 t$ y, l4 \' E% P
我們的大學生
, u  |$ o8 n) e3 A  p2 M' r3 n
+ K+ Y, L7 K# G- k( K6 ^3 v
. M! F$ \2 Q3 U! U
! g4 }9 L' I" q4 j6 }
( r" Y0 ?& S$ z, f6 V

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:; N' A! |0 ?3 h2 H/ u+ s

' D: L  r, s+ q; k, Q8 b' r4 B: b7 m& \/ M3 V8 `
有見地 !!!: r; n4 i7 ?" }1 z/ x
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.html2 l. b3 t3 G1 q& e

( f) ^9 Y5 s4 q+ lI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 2 c) B4 l$ X7 D+ U7 d
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
& A6 b- ?" p3 ]3 n9 xI pretty sad that about the University official.
. }+ s! t4 D, o) Q% ?% z* W  T. Y$ 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
6 c7 [1 D2 M: n, z2 X- H, F
: Z8 Q( a% ?+ \! U7 g1 A[ 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:
$ h' `. S1 @0 d/ X# U$ L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$ n/ x9 l) r9 H+ W6 s  R) s" V
' }! G3 c" V! h, M# H
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

* y, m! u7 p: U/ ]1 j2 |1 a- M. B1 Y/ C" B2 v
兩者有何分別?
2 q1 d  C) |! j3 ?中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?