奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
% Q, I' a0 x2 x  O+ i% T9 `7 G8 }/ V6 J& f0 y1 I3 Q
agree,
7 _* J! K6 f4 F! |我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
3 y  ^4 r+ D9 \但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
0 x+ I  l! }- w3 R期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

# |' Q: U; \; }' G( J/ |, m$ q  hhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html0 {5 K" L3 Q# v4 E# Z% @2 T. y
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3 [9 H3 z6 R! r
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.
8 k! R- [) v, A' ~9 G3 gJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
4 k1 J* U) K3 D7 V% _* @" X- m有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 1 |0 c) H" C) F+ i2 K

5 r/ q/ f1 b# u. n5 j; r係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???: d& @; Q5 C/ l! y! e0 }; f  s

. |5 w5 L8 k) B  `5 a% N7 O6 E為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

' P4 F9 ?, s1 @

$ Q  I6 {# p* |% R2 m絕對支持啦9 G! b) Q5 S. [1 D( n+ c
' E7 G( d* D$ r4 G
有錯就認,打就企定
. |, m; k* N( b9 b% ]! t/ F
4 ~3 i! R# i9 Q% `" }( Z0 E無錯當然要撐到底
% U( U9 G4 h, J' `) L) c9 y
6 n  t; N! q/ f8 k但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
6 ]# S/ U4 m4 w! m6 f5 R; V9 O8 r0 D5 t6 r) C7 T4 `+ ~! I  y6 \
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" E$ Z! h( N2 l* n* @
0 s* a+ o: ~: V
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
7 F2 H; M( ?8 x# U6 m! O3 M' w" g" n1 T; L7 e
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生4 n6 r$ c' c3 L$ c% a

9 a# T. J% t9 ^, X4 l唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?% o8 z) I* h6 `+ q0 r1 U) K

. A8 V+ k! `$ y1 a我唔認為lor
' S% \: u# ]/ M8 D
7 N8 }! T( H- O; ?唔係話要整死佢地7 \: N0 g* Y2 m& I$ v+ f

( D1 D. M5 d( n而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
% h% c% H. Z) u" J* n
7 |6 l5 D" S6 K" R我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大4 B0 {4 x( M. ]; c, t4 q( _( U
- Q" [5 T: x! t3 X% s- b3 E
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
) T5 B. d& Y7 s! F. b: h& q7 T4 @) K/ l4 h! f
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由! D& }" Y0 j  X- E) Y3 L" o

( G7 Q; H* S0 |# ?% E1 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
0 |" ]) l3 D3 l" h"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非". a  S( `+ w' ?2 e8 G8 T* b# o

* @5 x! s3 Z) d7 p  T4 I6 ^我們的大學生
+ r$ D/ L# |, e* q: i! S5 Y0 f7 Z* M0 c1 s, E( ]9 A: p( M% m/ `* J
" M5 s& ^% |# e6 \
& w* ?" Y  l% q# s' P" M2 I# p

* p3 d3 Q! M3 h( {3 y0 W

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:2 G5 D. z, g5 w! `+ E- h6 f/ \

9 F, ]; R$ {/ O* `& t
7 `0 O4 E8 r, ?9 k/ N1 F' P有見地 !!!
4 O" g2 _* m& k) @) ^1 `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
4 t- M" _5 q! ?; q! ]7 u
6 [: N" s/ e' q# u5 M0 ?  hI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
2 _% r" @4 m& R* _. r# }- [0 dI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. # W, l" U9 ]' K
I pretty sad that about the University official.
0 Q+ ~: |- u: _: G5 n/ e5 J4 oIt'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
6 D/ N* [  E) F$ r: ^$ j; P. _: u6 k8 `3 v+ G! o$ ~
[ 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 n! g  \. D! `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  d1 I8 U. S* |* p4 ?% G1 G$ f
" R' e$ F0 N3 N* B' v9 X" q! v
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

: B* U. k" W5 J/ b/ _6 W( x( Z3 z: f4 o( F9 U
兩者有何分別?. P# s5 M8 c6 h: O, N0 p, P8 s
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?