奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
5 A; X5 G+ e! h$ Q  [1 r+ f4 \1 f! N0 d# i9 `; D
agree,
+ q  B5 v8 a0 `" c( W1 ^9 X我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,5 ~9 a, B: |8 J5 \& n+ r
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,. A7 H# w" _$ Y8 N' s! u( F) q, g
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

4 i- X) d# M4 k# q8 P
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html: g6 n+ |$ Q7 D
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) [2 J2 `" w  ^/ Y. m; P9 a
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.
9 l4 W& x2 ]) I% k" C6 n( bJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
' N5 P9 u: A- p; k! Z2 v' P有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ % D! n! [' C& t/ v( V

" p# {, f  G. J. G) j1 O$ |係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
. x/ @# T2 _8 u( e% ~2 U8 N4 Z7 a
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

% g' Z8 ^% Q9 u$ q  E" @. U' @" u; ^% \7 _
絕對支持啦* {0 @3 d7 l) z4 \0 A/ ]
9 U, O7 u9 R/ E4 l, L9 \3 t  L+ \
有錯就認,打就企定
1 i+ R: s1 j# n, m' Q3 x9 e
7 k( \+ a, l& \/ [3 R無錯當然要撐到底
% n, W* c8 {+ }# m5 N/ B; y, b" h) c
8 Z$ e/ v  q; Y8 E/ ]; _& Y2 s8 W但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩' p; E5 x; D# A9 t

8 w# Y9 x8 p) {1 I" o8 [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! y  g$ r5 B# b! X! M3 i
) Y& u6 j! o8 {* ?* j( u& a
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
8 G, v1 O/ `$ B% G' l
( D7 d- v3 D7 B; {# q4 S我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生7 W  B9 Y6 `/ @0 O% b) P

: L. @& s1 a3 \# ^. Y唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
; K/ q, ?6 J* m3 ^0 z6 n) R! f( o, K
我唔認為lor
0 l2 _) h$ g7 I7 h7 s9 E4 s" a: W" B; e+ @" c9 ^) k6 U0 T: K! W) o9 u
唔係話要整死佢地& s2 H1 W3 a( I+ U" l) P
, a% O3 n( w  {
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用; H$ u% _4 ~+ j* [: g
( k% n- |; H4 V$ d/ o0 H& R: |
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大9 y! ^+ x& B( h% ~8 l" h. V, [
7 ^  Q) B9 ~3 J3 r
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
& m5 D+ v* S5 O4 P
, Y! `" V8 [; M. Y2 y唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
5 t6 x; @1 ~$ [9 S+ I
  v: e" d% v6 p" m8 U  i* L# {3 B$ Q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
+ H! o2 H  L, }; F6 C8 P0 K) 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"; E4 d2 J: w# ?( s

+ @& X# [+ u1 \7 R- t( N我們的大學生
, d# X2 ]! k' g3 m
, E( r* d) L  L3 ^: V1 D+ n: ^' g. U8 P

$ z; Z0 D0 u7 O+ \1 {. g: X, X3 Y+ H; x* C7 y+ P. L

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
) j0 Z$ f7 l2 j5 v6 j
0 ~7 u1 c9 T% a: E
; n: u7 @# y7 G+ a/ `" ^有見地 !!!/ |2 j" v+ t9 o! ]2 q8 c1 V
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.html3 X8 j1 _" r' U% \4 q3 O& n& A9 o: G

+ n& ~; }5 d" T- j1 KI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
0 G# @' `) e$ oI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
$ k) o, A9 o- s* e" rI pretty sad that about the University official.
) Q& g9 E1 s9 ?1 j; L, ~$ y$ s$ v, VIt'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  I  J+ C9 M9 ^' @- F

# G9 Z: }  C) R7 P" z  r+ {3 S8 v[ 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:; @! e) X7 I, p
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& A& j, |+ l" s

4 _' x" K, V6 x) }% ~- Z[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

- u! |6 [0 f  B0 N3 M! v( E1 A2 [' y
兩者有何分別?( G% H7 m* E* J+ U) X% H$ c
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?