奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:5 g1 i  _. s& X2 \+ l4 }. R

% ~3 t/ K; s1 ^/ P$ \+ r& vagree,9 K, W9 Y3 E% G$ Y, K
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,* W& K+ }7 A6 s4 u
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
, }, |- g& H2 ^  i% x% O( h) [期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

+ \* h; M: Y& m# O) b
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html6 x# n: l! j% M2 m
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
& d3 T  b( h6 \- ?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.- g7 R3 `% ~0 P( i( g$ {
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
& S$ ~' F/ g, ^7 P) W有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 5 h# \% s, X+ d8 L1 t2 g

* R7 y8 {5 g8 z係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
9 P, k" j+ l- e& Y1 `+ y1 I9 U- q% v) g5 z' e9 B
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

) n. t5 }2 C  W  O) u) Y

  b! A' N! d: j; k9 `' U6 c絕對支持啦
: H6 c! d' q% m
7 y1 X$ N1 \2 k. I- w9 t( o% c有錯就認,打就企定
( B' V* V7 w+ Z- B% J: Y9 n% w
0 p2 @! x$ G0 }8 P( W. C; M無錯當然要撐到底$ C8 L) o3 l* l8 _

5 N- G3 ^7 s1 F* Z+ C但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩5 e. d' ?, b  f: P- O
7 T5 I& `& L7 ]: W
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. a) X2 |: H/ V1 p. E0 o/ p
; q+ }3 p4 j2 n. _6 z
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力" d+ G0 ?) D. B+ _! Z2 |

0 u  {% @7 ]1 T/ X) Z我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生4 g* k( K( M5 _/ d; Z! s

4 i% `% Y- c3 C$ {唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?. L3 N2 @$ K8 A* C2 a

9 m2 l3 |! [6 x( m2 F我唔認為lor
4 z1 Q: b8 K, ]% R" s7 s4 j8 _: X( S3 N+ B1 j0 C9 c! ~
唔係話要整死佢地; m( i% j& F' ^0 u- b8 @

) d$ R. [, ~& C9 T而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用+ _8 |" T& U' F+ {
, r5 `% e4 A! l
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大2 `+ i+ Q* _5 h4 P* R) B) b* Y4 S$ w

' X1 E, Q: ]8 U有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
5 R) Q+ o6 }; J' \) x* K' j. h& t5 z
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
2 d6 H/ U  m1 v% D2 I8 h# i4 w) @( |
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( |! K$ u2 k7 C5 D8 S# ^& r
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"$ D8 S- U& W3 g

: @: ~  k. r- E8 Z9 V$ [我們的大學生
% `+ {, U( }+ u, b% K+ i% Q* d8 Q* a6 h4 {+ I2 K+ i* f8 M! o4 k
; _6 a. J7 q/ z& ?9 [& r5 \
8 z' W$ i: o7 ~  \$ v

0 l/ y5 l  s, _$ u& D& u( Q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:0 [5 g2 N9 K9 V  n" c" y% c9 @  A
3 M! q8 Y* c- i, J3 j
9 _4 k) N9 @5 I, ^6 H( ~. j
有見地 !!!
# K' F% x/ g; O+ {( E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% ?/ N! Y% K; ?: D8 w
' m& Y5 i: ^4 i/ c, u) S6 x
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
# l: u+ k7 _0 G# MI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
2 Q8 j6 F7 X/ k- P( O9 aI pretty sad that about the University official.+ V, @. c$ G( n  t6 p
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 la4 ~+ W4 J/ H: }5 ]1 ~$ g$ y

* v6 ^# Y6 `2 V6 S" ^: R[ 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:
1 m" U0 M* n  {7 D" j' U7 D6 l# ~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; j8 i5 a% U; ]  l" P

9 U3 N  m' b  v* E0 P[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

; S' E2 Q* T0 G& D- H* V. p# m+ s' t$ c) X* U
兩者有何分別?
5 _' r/ C4 p- |# T8 l" Z3 H' @中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?