奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:8 _0 N8 N' V1 d5 k/ v

8 h' k- C; s9 Pagree,7 b+ s: R  g0 e0 \
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
9 w. e, b6 w+ R! Q" ?) s. t但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
" Y9 p* q$ ~: G9 {/ p! g. W8 \* O6 U! ~6 a: M期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

7 e* }% r: b$ }7 Y3 lhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
1 Z  {; P" i8 D! z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1 Y6 D. q) }/ h/ [4 v* e0 w1 r+ n
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 C) V6 P- D  v" [3 b* j2 qJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
! R' f9 G6 p9 t1 m: \+ O有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 7 `1 }/ y0 D; L

( ^5 Q4 Q; R% L$ F0 z$ [) W係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???) C5 C7 d% O4 M+ X& E: c/ K0 F

4 N6 B+ f4 T/ ~; I% O+ h+ q為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

& ^0 U) ~! ?4 ]
+ [* q  C$ \% Z1 }: T% e( r絕對支持啦
4 G* J' Q" t; e2 r* J) O" @" `4 s
有錯就認,打就企定
" _* i1 K, o. @0 t: R) ^9 N
1 S& Q( p- b0 I' Q/ V. K! z/ t無錯當然要撐到底
/ w7 b- {; |1 S8 m, g' [
* x+ {0 C4 D" ^  B0 Q/ b但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
: |% `8 Y( y. _+ J; ]& p; H' B) z5 E& K* c6 Z  T& A
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" T3 W4 `/ q' l) t( s; ]# \

$ a# r8 N& g9 {6 R* k5 u一份公眾讀物係好有影響力/ v+ X( e) m+ v3 c3 @! x
( d+ S' W& G9 q# Y* |4 o
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
, o# L9 l+ T& [7 [; g! n3 B7 k7 @! c2 Y- I* ~
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?9 ?$ E* |0 K+ d, A* ^
. P: j, ^+ {' E: j- |8 w# l. w8 m
我唔認為lor
& i( p) s. Y; }2 p0 K- A# w0 W
  m8 H0 J2 c: d8 m# J唔係話要整死佢地
5 s2 T9 N+ t5 L( h, H8 D" _2 T
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
; @) ~2 w0 j& ^4 K6 ^
- {. c8 z; s( C" g3 ]/ C5 R  O我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
7 F' m+ ^- C; \0 ^; R! H3 `( V$ W2 A' u$ u' w( R# f5 M2 w
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
. E& p9 O! g: {5 j5 h! q$ r+ H+ x- @$ a+ a3 N: u
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
2 L! _0 g, R# x: d  w
( t% b1 n2 v6 i: j& |5 k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
- Y$ d( v; l) [- n# m+ Z) g4 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"3 h* |5 g3 i. D' n3 L& ?% X

& s8 x, \. z: n. B  `7 a4 k6 U我們的大學生; h6 J" S" B6 O1 r
% K( N; k4 m1 ]6 z' l; e
, L- T, `0 o. i5 ?5 G

* Q" B0 i3 ~0 j' X: c8 M$ n$ P' D& X3 x) F/ D& O9 K( z

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
. S+ W9 {. L1 e. I
3 h- o8 Z7 V! x. u! ~# \/ J: z1 \9 l
有見地 !!!1 }' R* J  C/ O% X4 T* V$ v/ W
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
" a7 A+ s& P4 W! u4 z1 y2 |$ e! r" x9 i5 y: r' h' a; B7 O# V
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 2 q' {/ o: \6 E
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
+ E. k6 k9 z" M! n& N  O* |I pretty sad that about the University official.. U* U2 p- @1 n4 d# h. y% ^4 x
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
5 f  F! Q+ q, ~2 [. K) I* ]% q- q' k9 f* \6 a" I# G7 e1 J
[ 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:# I2 G2 P4 k) b8 }  J
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( u# l# c2 {/ g2 Q' \0 P5 ?/ h
' k1 X& B; Y- ?9 j2 }3 {
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

( ~1 e9 C* F2 s5 ]
- S' ]8 C  l/ A7 h3 ]* ^6 K9 }兩者有何分別?! T4 {& p: ?7 U0 ?/ E
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?