奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:( e, B9 L3 |! a$ e. j
" C: n3 t( W) L! r( s  |$ {; `2 {  @
agree,
9 z. L4 ^0 Q; d# t' d" X我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
6 k! A5 o6 s4 j3 v* H1 Y) B但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
0 ^8 N! L: q) s' Z8 }期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

9 b& S& C$ F# ]& K2 x. h
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html/ w$ @4 ^9 w6 l$ b, V
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! X! o5 u& b" f; j
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.. n6 X2 l8 J4 o$ s
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
, d: v- L4 P4 ]' p/ j有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
) ~& y( l: [8 d) d0 k4 R& P2 p( }+ ^7 c9 F/ @2 p- q& H
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
4 D, E, `9 i" W5 V
# h# U( r* s- y+ X  N0 l* B7 [為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

) E" L- j% I* W2 _7 l4 S4 Z1 ^

8 x5 G" C) u/ G6 W! t絕對支持啦; u2 e  j9 A7 n
- \7 M) o' ^' z* O/ }0 B
有錯就認,打就企定
& m4 g! H$ v' q! [& q
, m. P8 \- c; V, s5 i2 I# S+ @# N無錯當然要撐到底
4 f% j# s+ Y: S( l: q; o% h2 r& ?
( N' H' `% o6 X; r# u' W9 H0 L但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
0 q5 D( T3 s6 k/ i0 j' G2 |0 v
+ C% M  x. u- \" a. X& {0 I/ h0 m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) P6 v: ~# ]; @8 x0 q

' Y: A/ Z. n0 o6 M, W一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
  C$ k6 l6 W0 _6 B- y0 w* `2 I
$ x- P8 s1 ?: X5 E. L; ^我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生. F  j* a4 m; K9 N$ b
( V! Y- Q' w: R
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
) ?( g7 O& f. x
' `6 d! `9 E$ T8 f' o/ Y  T2 j" J我唔認為lor; q5 w5 _+ [1 E

5 G8 {3 x" e2 g( |" C& E" J: k+ j+ ~唔係話要整死佢地
+ k9 L% Z+ ]: `6 y* u' q) t
/ E5 b9 v# Q/ u. J; s- @而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用% P0 u* G2 M1 _2 \

9 ?6 J* o7 L; b: O) ~. f我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
& T! J8 ]3 Y: d( F) u. ^, L  b
; |: J( W# j6 J$ l- V有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
$ L7 |/ s. ]- b4 N3 q9 E
' q) o1 t# H7 L& G7 Q! ~) E唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由# L5 Y- m6 Z; S3 w  m

% k( t) F6 ]. F4 V1 U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
9 q2 j9 F, G8 J  z" }* `' H' }- 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", Y3 _1 l: y2 ?( K( {

& d9 l1 W' {8 A# U5 C, U, o* v我們的大學生
4 I- `) {+ d1 p7 {5 u' s* g0 u5 j4 n% ?: a

. U$ z# W1 ^! _6 w- a! b' E& a$ _' L: i6 p( `

+ K% u7 Q# I0 c" k3 z9 j

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
/ r" t6 W( Z1 b
: g  o! j* ^. B3 }8 E& z/ L# O3 l; _" s( u& r/ @/ @
有見地 !!!9 u. I: d: z* b7 b( X2 u, E; v0 Z
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
7 k) i7 f7 q! Q
$ C+ z' X. n- B9 ^I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
" N$ N. p; _; O5 T8 S. Q4 N1 uI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
% y7 y7 G$ c4 UI pretty sad that about the University official.! f6 c" ~$ t8 w6 \+ s0 E8 j
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' j6 E9 q; ?% e& ?9 B- |

9 F0 y' n2 u7 G0 C1 P  m- y[ 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:- K4 U9 n$ x; y; A  d3 {+ e0 h2 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% k* }% Y; ]* k) q
' t9 T, S7 Q4 n5 ~% r1 i
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

$ S" S1 d& S' t. X& W

0 y6 K1 A  ~$ H7 [" x兩者有何分別?3 G: E  J% A: I& g/ z
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?