奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:# N! W% H# g) s' R' @% z3 T# o
/ n0 _( |  H! u6 t# V- u9 A
agree,
; T$ Z  o, l. A) r/ _# _我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
! b! ^  H3 c& e8 a# T但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
- {4 q2 g/ g# N1 U1 f# O7 J期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

+ q* E" }+ b1 p
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html, J, }% ]) L" B4 u' r
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
% d2 e7 @) v7 Z' d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.- \4 R$ _  F  k# X* n( b
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
' B7 @/ s& C8 @有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 8 t- f; ^2 Y0 I: ~: E3 O* o" N

. w! y8 l. [8 v7 b4 f4 {- t% F係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???$ R2 E( [1 q3 @7 T

) V! [- \* F8 e為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

8 D# C/ \% u- Q2 \

& ^% x# Z: g5 _絕對支持啦
2 ~/ j6 W. |1 X) y7 |2 w5 U
; @4 |; J3 q/ h$ I5 B. K有錯就認,打就企定# t  b* ]' g8 M2 I' r
1 t# m2 M* Y) Z
無錯當然要撐到底
; g$ g# ^, q% U/ o# I3 c% a. S8 Y7 s& y/ i, Y
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
2 l/ F9 g. W- I4 V* T
9 b) R4 R" j4 I8 _8 e* j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
$ e5 `. \. [$ v# b
1 s( C7 k3 h! u! A+ t& E" [一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
. h9 y- C# y3 `5 Q9 Y4 K: |% A+ \" B# @2 x' @/ w+ ^7 b
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生* [" {2 I! c# q/ e
* x# \6 D( i; {+ ]) C
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
2 T" c; z# r, h9 |. k3 n& k) Q, [
我唔認為lor
  u9 h" R# A8 O7 I& F0 Y
" V8 y# v- i4 W唔係話要整死佢地- V4 c6 f4 b3 H

# y3 u( f3 w8 U$ ]. i( p/ ]) ~而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
3 ~! h! h# m* s& X; ~1 |* I$ s# Y1 m9 ?5 M/ e
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
1 @% h% y+ _! r2 T. X8 L" Y* o
* ?$ i- q; a( @% @2 i* l有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的5 g. _9 ?8 q, h, N: N

1 H: s" G) W# m# V& N! Q) i7 U唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由$ V' P9 A$ K# v: C5 S

# q! Q; f( A  N  P4 _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 ]) ]% \6 A$ a# w) X9 ^3 b" o% 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"
8 t2 p* `/ s" Q8 Z% }, }$ n. X% O' ]  k! z9 s" X
我們的大學生1 K; U; Z& d2 ?9 f  T

$ f* E- u- T0 Q2 y( r
) ~$ Q% n5 j8 @  q% K8 J# O( V5 F9 o4 E, D' ~( R, o1 z: {8 N
# t5 l6 U9 C- W( o8 b9 g

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
, i/ _& A. y' d" q3 ^
6 O* s; m: \0 v% W2 Y! j/ }8 P  _8 h3 n- n% Z) Z* q
有見地 !!!
) z% I; B0 {% K$ f$ _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  I, o0 p  o; H; `9 \; _6 s
. w' U8 s5 H% a- E+ L
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
9 d9 W# o2 Y- W; H1 BI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. + `' f% `4 ?: p) I% \
I pretty sad that about the University official.* J9 L+ k. O+ k( I
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; X1 G% m; s2 ^' x

0 B1 T8 i: K# v  ?8 D. u% @[ 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:
; C6 c, A) E4 R+ i  C  W6 y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) z5 B: t! c+ A5 ]* g* B
, ?" T& E4 J  G+ I- c
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

) Q( y( J3 m+ C; H' N5 y4 h

1 P7 G8 @! t' _% _兩者有何分別?
' n; |' F3 b, ]" B中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?