奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:) U1 b' I( K( ^5 `( y7 h. n
5 @& L$ A( Z- Z# s* p5 s2 D
agree,! _% Y) W8 @6 a* b
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
& l+ Q. E4 q# E0 C但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
/ G0 b8 }/ J5 C7 g8 Z; }( G+ L期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

" b! p+ X; m  Q& M+ ihttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
6 A; _; t7 U9 ^+ W7 T* 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" O/ H2 u9 }( C/ k5 r7 m: Y
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.3 t8 N% v2 e) H; _
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
4 j1 w: e& i+ s1 P4 K$ U; `有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ; P+ \; V, \  J6 J6 v) A
3 a; z7 o, t. X. J2 ?
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???, R! ^# r$ x$ o3 k& z
; r0 H* r- ^& `8 Y3 N2 b
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 \+ `% o3 B2 g5 `7 v) _$ }
4 Z) U; i) V. M5 H5 `
絕對支持啦
0 p/ S# O+ Z# F. T0 i2 E" ~- f, n1 [& D& O8 j( {. P
有錯就認,打就企定' n+ {6 g/ [% U9 ]: @' Q  p: U

" ?; H( J! [! N- {無錯當然要撐到底
# P6 O1 P" H3 L. r/ I; o0 d% R( |/ O3 G0 h9 ^2 E; b
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩* C; B: W9 Z6 s8 V. Y# {, E

0 Y9 |! y6 R& ?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. I7 K- {( w) g" Z* Y
; G0 V6 y8 ]$ o/ |# P6 Y2 T
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
2 |9 ^2 X$ @  n: G& O4 l# v% d: b1 B* {) j) ~( N
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
9 T. @* K' o0 M: q) R$ L) U& J) }0 z: u7 V& K
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?6 U: `+ H) k4 U, J# y9 H1 c( U$ I+ L: @
  h: O( H6 |3 l( W& s
我唔認為lor- U4 j5 G: T; b2 s* j$ q

% [# X! P4 Z4 ?$ g% J唔係話要整死佢地; m% E0 g; l% U6 n$ V1 R7 e) H( @, p

$ u9 Y- h7 m# r2 K& i* A% r而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
& h2 v. I8 E1 {1 l- q/ i* u5 w; p4 {- O1 E
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
8 ]: q+ o' g4 n; n# t0 o) I  q5 I1 G# F
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的' ]( l$ w/ \& W2 k4 n
4 s7 ~9 h7 s, t% V0 ?2 }
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
6 I5 L3 H6 N7 \) e+ h. W
6 Q7 i3 O8 y/ F, i' I7 K# F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
8 Q* G5 o. ]6 N9 q& 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"5 }( G$ Y4 T; v9 S) `6 u( b3 h

& z7 L9 O0 X) T9 N8 S- H; S1 Q我們的大學生" {9 {3 n2 X* L2 A8 I
! y/ ^) ?8 ^* l/ i6 `; [
; I! B0 w5 k1 s: U) M4 ]

: L9 k) {: A# a8 t& R; {+ z" ^1 |+ F8 z: m1 ~- b

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
0 r5 {4 N- z& l/ e" S# V' T, j0 y! B; F$ d" h$ ~0 z: i' w1 f
5 Z0 ]/ p. ~7 n5 a' B# G3 {
有見地 !!!
2 F, n; m5 R2 j3 n. _( l: q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.html5 _: j2 p9 z4 ^- a: d

9 T" @) ]- J9 Q  ?I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
' i5 y( z0 m" v0 G0 t0 _3 v( \' fI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 2 F" O0 L5 p5 H- Z  a+ h
I pretty sad that about the University official.; [' ?& V7 k. {/ b3 u; 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
4 m# K/ O* b8 H5 W+ i
& U$ r" I. T9 v  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:
( A8 S; w$ g3 y; r) d7 t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
5 m# G+ h2 {* C% f' {
: T- r$ N2 U. |; E[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

; J4 Q9 N% q2 S6 c% T
  M: W9 z0 T/ {5 ?. u2 Y( |" g2 i
兩者有何分別?$ ^6 c8 d3 W. _6 q1 I
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?