奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
0 \* x' z0 k4 h0 P/ b" D( K
( d) H  r0 ^2 H/ S" e. S: ?9 ]7 ~agree,. C  i; L/ P0 b7 r( y
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
- {4 x  x2 F) @. i但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
5 W; N$ `4 L8 H' d) A0 N& m期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

% ^1 [, T8 ~9 A. T0 y$ J
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html$ o2 ]# {* M. X5 F9 l4 b; U
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* Z" k7 x; ]9 p$ F% Z. X
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.. }* o9 c! g+ n! [
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:/ V, {5 C4 U- y  N0 t! |
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
! i" A+ J. s  k  t7 M4 f5 r1 Y& e5 U& t8 X' @, k- B& b- ^
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???$ K$ a8 w5 @7 _) g2 y: {1 s9 A

$ V) d# R7 ]$ p* v  w為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

2 g- D, b- |( E" T- C% ~% Z( @" Y& s$ H

% a' b) P& H# L$ ]絕對支持啦; x, {6 A  H; ]( L' q  v9 {' s
3 u2 P( o) b' I3 e  G* q9 x
有錯就認,打就企定, b# p8 Z" v" M4 k7 o: `
$ }+ |4 z, n: m" \4 b) t3 S
無錯當然要撐到底
: U7 Y' N4 n" u
# O) r3 c6 w; ]5 ^9 M但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
$ [$ E0 W# ^% P) X
! h" j1 i8 x" e7 o% 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
' B! e% k, C" m; |$ M' |" m& D
% n) L$ s( ]' W8 p$ r3 o一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
! u, _9 A% P3 J. D. d' o4 Q5 H9 U# e% K; d* `/ b
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
5 Z9 z5 F$ W8 `$ P6 |& ^! y! x! h2 S5 D% H+ {( L
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?1 o6 x$ c9 Y6 b) I; y* d. y+ i

( b6 T7 `" e8 f& _! b1 w4 q我唔認為lor
# R7 _8 S# J( @. W5 q" Y; I" q. f+ v1 P' K  G4 D7 j. z
唔係話要整死佢地% _7 A8 n! \, C

9 x( v3 ]4 A, A( ?' d1 J而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用& b, V+ |' e. |5 R" d3 {
/ b- M/ o! E" I( L# o
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大+ I  J" ?. C& N2 m

$ W# E2 D% e* ?  h) `' S% ^有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的& A- y( l1 i% u
5 {5 w! |9 R, c) S+ c
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
; z4 R# w1 t! N% R' r" [& M1 C! K, I) k$ N8 a) 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
( K& w# S. f7 m  ?4 ^"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
  V; b7 d/ Q- Q  b/ n5 i$ t) B6 x: ]& e7 D0 c. p6 {( j( d7 E
我們的大學生4 B' j+ W, K5 }4 L" T
9 l4 o9 W4 @7 L. F/ P7 P
6 B& N7 ^8 {2 Q3 K5 i: w8 k
0 f  e' K6 K( @: H) O6 K
( ^$ u8 t5 @$ r4 Z' Z0 A: d1 \

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:/ @2 z4 _' l& D! {9 I

8 n$ @( L7 d' H! @/ y1 _4 @9 r) ^( \$ n( B) f' ]
有見地 !!!4 n& ^% M+ X2 V! S1 z2 S' `- X$ k5 J
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
% W5 d' ~: {" C+ N. H9 k, ^) ^2 w+ M8 ^3 C1 A# b3 I
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 2 x4 Q9 J, p* [& E' h
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 4 g: g, P6 ^& I, ]/ ~; I
I pretty sad that about the University official.6 n$ v$ l% y: t! y7 l
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
& z1 h5 ~9 D* B  T/ \- Q; x9 Q1 Y" q
7 \) D; U( R7 v2 G- l[ 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:
: q0 w  D; L. G3 u! ]" M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' w  W. U6 H" d! L9 j4 y

( g* v) y7 ]% e' b[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

: ~  j$ \0 G; n' V5 U0 u0 t4 `
' P  k: L- F2 g$ n$ t3 g1 p( ~9 V
兩者有何分別?) O) P. d. |! C+ v3 x+ ^6 b) O$ ^
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?