奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
: l) m) c( m8 M$ A1 d9 E& ?# y
$ Q1 O! G4 v( X. {7 m, Sagree,3 D# p% Q2 p" n( t
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
/ @$ f1 \. @5 {5 {但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,8 t2 Z+ B- V& W9 A
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

) [/ B  y% \6 U: t/ z
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html. w8 z9 r* d* m: t' E
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. J! w3 @3 K' V$ b; q: d" B
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.
! \/ F8 [  E9 x8 XJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
9 r1 }/ D; k3 d# o- M5 ^2 M+ P2 n6 I& b3 l有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 0 F; b. P- r- c! k  h; z( i- Z
( d& @4 P6 k0 ~9 |
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
) U5 R% v7 f) V5 c) E1 H+ [6 R* w4 p3 l  U
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

' [7 ~3 ~( b* z- t" d+ \5 E
: s1 m; r! H5 m% {  p% p9 L+ _
絕對支持啦& t, Q# x  [2 U1 p4 T; a
( ~1 s. z( ?; l: A/ ~
有錯就認,打就企定  u9 c5 q# `8 x3 {. P- j2 n

" |. w" e& k8 @( s無錯當然要撐到底" d/ @0 }% Y) _4 y+ `/ o
! h6 n1 p  \9 H4 W. v( A+ E4 K6 l
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩( `! Y! ^! w! b2 f/ u
/ V  v9 B/ S4 U+ ~5 }
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
' z% z4 f8 ~3 I9 N" T* K& D  l& L( P8 R# L5 z3 N
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
- e; q* p: h: ]. F8 ~! t* F7 J( Q1 E, ~- s
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
! g1 @8 d& d, B# ^
! y* J: [" c, o0 K: k9 J唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?: R, Q. d% W8 c9 }- ]
) U# N, f& g1 U/ R; J
我唔認為lor$ c: O$ M% X. E
4 l( `9 G7 i: H$ n( T
唔係話要整死佢地( a/ S8 n5 Q6 U5 |+ j! n) t( ]2 |

, w( i1 {6 j+ I$ t& P3 V9 I' I/ B而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
; W( q% i$ ?' \/ S+ i. n6 @: n: j( ~
: X- l$ u# P: Q% X$ V8 o我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大% t& z" D3 s# l+ e. R  l' |  U  {
* ?; ~3 A0 q4 j2 ^+ N8 C
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的  g. F  h6 ^9 Z, G
' m2 T; l) _! F7 Q' L9 q1 L
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由+ N- [1 X) J4 q  Y$ A
  |4 c% ~1 D" \- k* P
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$ B  e7 h  |4 ~1 |7 n
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"  x) ^5 e- r$ N

- R1 {% x, c, T2 p5 {+ R我們的大學生, z  ?/ t$ }( n* S4 y4 ]  }4 O

: _9 z6 h/ W# R4 z  Y% B0 X% h# S8 h+ q2 `% U( r

# k) p, Z: [5 ?. u3 i. [: h8 o: e+ _- ^0 i

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:* G, o& h' Y1 y+ ^* \- E, C% F& u

% @& Y, {1 R3 Y# N% r5 v8 Y- e8 s% J. F% E) ?
有見地 !!!2 d/ @$ Y% s. b0 d% }0 D
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
8 }  k% ?2 B5 H& M
& }6 h( x1 B9 x$ e$ N8 oI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
: Y+ w  B/ g, \7 j) v) L3 l9 FI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
5 A% d9 R" i% E, x( W2 i2 XI pretty sad that about the University official.4 q8 i% _. y  ~7 r6 c& T
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; u: Y, d+ r( m( Y
$ U( ]" v9 O* g6 v1 C& Z
[ 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:
7 m) @: M  V* G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 la5 H' r+ C# E8 ~# z( Y" X

3 g4 L2 q/ r$ K7 X  e/ w. F[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

. M8 M% u- ^1 r& z' H6 M. O
8 l& b* k" m& x% `# m
兩者有何分別?9 K/ J; A% ^- D2 e8 [+ x
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?