奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:6 h' y8 Y, X) P* c4 M! {: R4 @
% N1 f2 {- j/ N' e
agree,
" U, j9 D- l  k2 D! j5 y& C我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
6 c! F$ C; D  O$ v( o/ b但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,6 j. _( w3 x- G. y
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

1 F4 H6 B  r8 v6 x0 _3 ihttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html/ d, Z  w- q: E- H
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' e/ T. u0 l5 p9 M# G% A  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., ?; b1 U0 Q3 l: s2 c0 m0 T
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
" U2 n* T; E% _3 x) L( j9 s有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 8 n5 b- t; J5 U5 I4 S- A

. t) M) n, [# `" K6 M) f; ~係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
9 Q& N$ V9 ~2 i* O' j9 K
- L5 W* ^$ w# M7 x# }為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

2 m! a& A- ?  o" o" v, W) I, X

- V5 l+ B: G5 ?9 x: ?+ B3 d, M3 y絕對支持啦
% S( u9 m4 O  P% [6 a9 z" S1 [! W% C" b, W: r7 G/ x1 o
有錯就認,打就企定
3 {! W5 o; |, S1 r8 ]& U" W: A+ q% |3 D* w4 O
無錯當然要撐到底+ x+ C" y" H7 f0 u! L

8 L6 [% o" M5 ~7 y1 @* M但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩! q- `: b9 q. P) f

3 Q# e" Q! h& X  @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
6 A8 F) ?; {6 b; l
4 r* x9 `0 e* f% g3 Y一份公眾讀物係好有影響力" ~2 b  V2 R: b7 R4 Z' A9 \
: @% d) \4 L# R! b" S8 F% D! c1 k
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生: `/ X/ Z4 k8 T" C) r

7 G" H, o4 s" P+ P/ y  [" T6 _, h唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?. B& ?# j$ ]: H/ T
0 B( y2 J$ E0 ~: F8 t
我唔認為lor' ~" c/ e  \  g" O  N) N# c  D0 l
: @: |3 C5 R. m; F! J
唔係話要整死佢地9 l3 F- T9 ]3 p9 p1 a5 C7 ]

1 I  b6 C, q9 J" ]8 T而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
' B) `' w& [4 e% u# K! ?& C6 z$ h/ G) s
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大, D! r( O0 @: M) V+ D4 x
, n. D" H/ q0 x6 S# U1 s+ z
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的) F* _6 `& q) T1 b1 ?. E
# Z: E2 q- r& s' r
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由4 H  `5 g+ L4 a5 e8 i- l; `+ E: m
* Y8 l% r6 j: v* ^
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
" w- e& I7 L( J"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 v+ n- z3 r1 g, I& Z

1 G8 s( x+ k/ U4 j1 D我們的大學生1 ^  C0 k3 d( P; d

# X$ V/ b4 }! y4 g$ W
+ N& S0 e/ E5 Y" x1 m1 ]. w
# c" F! Z3 W% o; M& k' b2 c
* t# e2 Z" B, ^! Y( E3 _1 _' m4 q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
1 h8 b' H" `0 v1 z& i+ ~1 O- C+ `( r! v, F- L& c# Z6 J

0 U5 ]* }, v. T有見地 !!!, e4 K* a& ~8 G( E/ X2 L- [! u
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
  K& P& F, N6 R6 z7 l: I+ ]' y) p3 k5 \  \& d: e* S5 V: k% ?
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. , w& l$ L9 z) a) `% {
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
+ L- r1 `# d7 Y% H' lI pretty sad that about the University official.6 ^0 H. j* `- \5 C/ `* d' y
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
  B7 |$ G& `, m9 H- W7 H" g' e6 Q9 _* g# |  ~
[ 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:: T0 R& ]" |( ^! f
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 la9 U: s1 y* @8 \2 p. e4 ]1 Q
/ U7 _# G  o% P0 u; G
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

$ J, v; p6 }1 H( |  H5 Y
0 o" X  \3 ?4 c2 V
兩者有何分別?, H+ g5 [  K. `; L; p, Z
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?