奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:; O3 ]# c: \  h! |
# \8 V1 W7 |5 ?  q0 G" F6 }+ m$ w6 m
agree,1 y7 k) c5 O" a
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
, ~5 G9 w+ @! I! u但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,) V( J' k. a0 D
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

  c" a) R( L2 U, Jhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html! R4 n3 P2 b; j: D! r! N) |3 q) q
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" b: ~2 ^* y$ w, ]' ~
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.
# R3 e8 D9 n* z* F! ^7 v8 OJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:( |* u( k7 L; c  L7 l
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
3 V% h. o1 C9 b: l4 N! ^& y4 {7 L2 ?3 M9 T/ Z
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
' L8 A  h8 o; ]
& I8 l: f8 ?' ^* k為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

% n7 \; n$ q7 Q9 X+ Y
. j# ^0 b( ^5 T/ q8 ~絕對支持啦
- S( M  s# Z  _3 p$ m7 }4 r, V
  q/ w0 }6 M! [3 ^, p有錯就認,打就企定
: \8 o! C, F7 @2 X/ g1 s* h' |, D; v/ e* P; j/ f
無錯當然要撐到底
9 X: F0 L6 n6 b, l7 H* @2 z9 u8 _# p% |
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
" }" E( A0 I7 ]2 a0 r
3 h! l+ j. P; `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: ^2 U# ~$ t# X" J0 C, [1 ^. `& v% w

4 h7 n( @- J/ K+ S( r% R; z一份公眾讀物係好有影響力8 n0 W/ B, U: W. `# o- V+ ~) R

+ D. t/ m2 L0 a  _我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生0 q& E( e( a: O- g1 x+ B
) d8 R; l9 a% X
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
; C/ O* K& f4 w$ I
: F2 P- ?1 e- G" Q) j我唔認為lor
) G9 v  ]. H; s" x/ J3 N: K) y2 t" X, T- j3 W
唔係話要整死佢地. r: w3 M; i+ [3 U9 v* i" s3 K* [
& s) S3 X+ m+ k
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用5 W+ b7 w2 r4 z) T0 H$ K
3 F* e" l! ^- w; Z! w4 f
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
& ?# q' j* K, X6 {
# s  M0 i% K5 F% W有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的6 e" h) A0 a* ^/ Z3 D; g% c
/ R2 n2 i- q' @/ R: k
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由( y' R& a; H+ `$ h1 Y$ {/ W
; s' ^/ t  r5 s% C3 }: A; x; G
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 R6 V! y. a, 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"
; o9 J9 {6 c& J( i) m) R* h2 m4 `' p2 [
我們的大學生
0 O+ d, T: c. v( Y, r& O  @
8 y' x0 F. r  z# M/ {0 k
6 z& t- U; S2 w" P. Y; R8 {8 I0 r. M" M1 n7 s2 e" Z

5 M+ r8 v9 n; L

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:) N1 A5 o1 t: L
: e+ c0 [# t, P# `5 C) o

. P  z( b4 F: \2 x, p* y: g- G# X; w有見地 !!!
, J+ T! M7 i* _. S. Q2 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
2 d" o4 S$ J# I8 n6 d* [& g' B5 J$ U! X& M
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
$ b- O6 \: w- A4 s3 C# |$ y/ ]I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. + O5 P1 x2 V: T" I+ K  Z
I pretty sad that about the University official.4 m% Q7 l4 U6 ^  W' B. G
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+ Q# T( w* _2 V* J

6 R- s0 ^- ?& L- u  H# _! ^' [[ 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:& i$ w( h  _2 K" f2 U, H" }
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
, i; {2 r0 x/ I1 \
/ Y% U, Q. j" b  {$ o2 M[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" z; [( L5 j( k. i' V  H/ P$ h
# ?1 O( q* Y4 Z' V9 h1 a) k兩者有何分別?
0 Y) r1 ?7 z: b! @/ @中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?