奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
2 {, \: ]9 [* @: F
# K) @# W) j" }$ u7 cagree,
* h( l1 H* b/ e/ S; K) X* z我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,3 J5 y/ Y4 g2 ~% A/ ]
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,5 g: Q' S: H8 {) W5 ~+ Q
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

; }# [  F9 F0 s8 l
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html2 Z, @2 ?- N' E0 s
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0 h+ N* b, [7 B, r* E# B- v8 `
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.
2 z7 d4 L* h# U( @Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:% S8 p, l: A/ ]6 [' J1 n4 J7 L# g
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
( j) K$ m: i- }* X5 G
3 @0 u3 M  q, F係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
$ P% f: i, a% Z$ r
* x% l* [, C5 T0 [0 r為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

, f( `0 f8 i& v

6 _6 Q, l9 z& N. U4 p% N* A( w絕對支持啦
5 W& c: J% X1 c' ]; {1 W
+ E, f2 N& y6 e7 A有錯就認,打就企定8 c" h5 D. Z- I" `$ Z" I
) s# B$ S4 c8 X2 H0 d7 p& c' W8 X4 R: R- l( }
無錯當然要撐到底
  g# K/ m- k3 ^) j
$ V! I  u, X3 {- _但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
1 q- m! h/ D: r* ?% Z% l
$ T2 _( c: T3 w) 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5 `. M2 j+ t8 ^7 Q( V
; c, W' ~7 o/ ]
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
: J; d9 n* `. A9 j
" Q  Z8 N) x. L4 Q, ^3 t我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生, L5 @) L4 n! v# ~$ ?. u
' K! K7 H/ b5 q
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?4 A5 r4 \' |8 H% z! k  s

# @3 \5 x. s7 \: g* \3 [我唔認為lor
! g% _; t3 d4 Z
% e! ^" ^, T+ q! E5 j唔係話要整死佢地
3 R$ p/ y2 K- ~# b( g" h  f' y
  r+ }* _7 x) O8 Y; U: @0 m. Q' H9 d而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用6 s: |* ^1 |9 ^  H2 g+ t! u0 \7 m! ?
) ^) [" l! u4 t& O7 {
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
0 O5 o+ Y% ]7 ^; C$ m8 B" P/ Q( f' [# t- Z; K4 L
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
8 @1 C* W! z2 b3 |# \" J
3 w3 q1 \) G/ D! ?$ i) S: ?, n唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由9 M4 O; {5 P2 P, x8 z
/ i, n$ S; `1 P2 I5 h
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& d! w+ J- ], s1 k
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
0 ?& u. A; X& p- Q
. Y& B. g& o+ E4 \% }/ H+ V# ?我們的大學生) R; O' w! O' ]! v; {5 \; O
8 T% N* T8 r& i, ?$ ^1 i8 {
$ g+ g1 [; B$ E% s  @  `( `; A$ e

& ?* u1 ]& d/ d. k2 j: \* }! |1 k7 K/ k+ _$ G+ x4 W

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
$ |/ l/ Y& g" f# P4 Y% q
, e$ P- j& F' u2 A9 ]
+ g* }- [2 a* a; l有見地 !!!0 r" M4 v9 x) |; t0 b6 _8 d# 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.html' |& T7 P& J6 E3 _

$ y( Y! J5 V- |8 a. II think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
4 H0 r; X8 r( z; W7 u1 @/ C" c& _! hI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 1 v& b2 {6 J" e8 ?$ |5 R
I pretty sad that about the University official.
( C% ^! q: i8 {. CIt'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
# s& J$ y5 ~9 m. V" V5 f) ?$ Z, k$ c, E4 U4 M# ]* d& Z3 B
[ 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:
0 h( T- t) ?  t* O+ [0 _+ C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) S1 X$ T/ W" P  d: N9 y

: i! q7 k3 |" t! m/ C3 K! [[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

2 o' h( U% B$ S% l5 p, D2 R, R: f: _/ G& d5 b! S! }
兩者有何分別?. m- }0 q# W; T
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?