奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:! I* M+ T4 B, ^3 u& c- Z) r

' a; Q, s1 g1 g5 R: gagree,/ }( |2 W1 K5 L0 ]% F8 E; _4 `0 @
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
+ A( p5 F0 x; I$ R& [, X2 m) b但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
$ b* m5 ^* U% n/ T: B期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

0 C+ b& K9 U9 a* L* `
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
/ G) Z% R* ~6 |* Z+ X  O  q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/ g. s, b2 a2 o$ U
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.( o% y. @, t% K
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
. [! U: o; f: E9 x有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
6 T) _: n0 a! }4 K4 N+ v
5 z6 _9 C9 r" m0 [. A/ a  r6 ?$ i# z係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
' g4 p1 h; H1 U6 z. d& l
) N6 u! y8 W( x& A; V為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

. l, [8 p( F8 n4 R2 d
+ \5 w+ X2 T- N2 ^
絕對支持啦, S7 ^8 _. z& ~, q! b: u
# T' B+ V, c6 }; B! {0 `  s1 c4 n& A
有錯就認,打就企定
# X2 K: S4 T& @; s0 r1 F/ @
  L/ v) g7 Z( r# J( G! b無錯當然要撐到底
# `% s9 l1 |$ \, \" h
% P3 L' U2 s% |7 Y9 J1 O0 U& O& [但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
# @! |- k" t; e0 f* t- t/ T% g( y8 g- q% M( E  [
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  F- z+ E1 u: [/ _( J" A4 @
  X) h/ G' W* Z) h$ v& @: x/ V
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& J% `4 `* {  q2 A

+ _) d' a$ b# [2 |& g; o1 _我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生7 T2 g, H- f* r% s

0 l( g3 n7 G6 S# R9 G- \; T0 n唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
, w! P: t/ A( v7 ?  P0 H3 r  f' M4 S) u
我唔認為lor
% X% X1 ~+ N6 z  G* L: r9 M9 V4 W: D
- w' C7 s* V5 J; c唔係話要整死佢地8 Y. P* C9 m1 Q/ ~& B# Z  t% u* C* ^
8 `( [+ r4 g1 B+ r) Z+ F
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用+ w3 ?, Z" S+ c" l* z5 ^

8 c$ Q$ r& E$ ?4 C1 W: ]3 d3 j我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
; i' C4 X5 `: o' P' b* C& n$ g+ e- H5 {7 d$ S) x/ E( G
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
0 g7 l% w; O+ ?8 q- F# F
  n7 h9 l" l7 [- _4 i5 B  X唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由7 ~5 y9 S3 H" W

9 d( C7 N5 E/ M5 a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
( ?4 P/ M/ K. A$ s4 B8 L"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"6 q3 @% M1 b0 F5 ^0 U  ~
" G; C& d% R. W8 W$ i
我們的大學生
" X$ j5 t% j4 b: I, e9 Y* @' A4 z7 z# _" y* K4 y- |
; z2 r2 Y6 F+ p+ l' [
2 f6 Z4 x$ u  F$ x# B: l
/ N4 Z& P, e( G- T4 X

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:! H1 k6 q! V# L& D

1 ?$ A/ U0 L9 k" J6 H4 r4 K9 p- [; G6 S( b- @$ `* Y
有見地 !!!3 p2 h# v9 s/ Q- N; T
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
7 V' q  J8 }: e0 D  j, s) \+ D, q/ ~* Z
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
' w  u4 |) W' G! v- b- yI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
# L; H2 M: G+ s4 BI pretty sad that about the University official.- y: P; l1 R  b: R
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 la6 ]; k$ O9 T6 z- b) b$ ~1 o- n
. C: q: D. s$ c2 X" R( P3 c
[ 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:
, n  V7 |) ~5 I0 P; w2 }2 k6 ?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
- }+ j" k. O8 B8 Y, U' P; g  s& r0 b" h
! m$ v! J! g. C[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

. \2 K& h$ o# s- M
6 G9 ^2 Y1 @9 [3 c( b. J! `
兩者有何分別?
+ p; m/ G( J( S: m' b! }; r中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?