奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:  U9 y5 ~1 ~8 ?6 e# Y
6 n: O( w% Z' _
agree,
5 [  ^2 X, n' A0 z1 Z我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
5 t2 Q& u) O/ s( S0 g5 P但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
4 U% J3 _* T  l! C# [- C期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

: H+ v  v% E& l$ Y$ @+ h
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
4 F9 {1 ]" Q) }/ C9 k2 o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
% K2 m$ p/ O2 @' ~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.+ _! z- D# R) g4 ~% \4 I) O
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:7 K/ V. w8 L! s2 }, C. O
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ; J& R8 E( k/ H/ ]3 d' R. i* [

) a+ A7 `* M+ o. [) P4 U! ?係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
! ~6 R% ~1 Y4 j/ {0 l" T2 V$ d
5 g2 Y8 B1 l; ]" D為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

8 @( F  s1 O6 J9 u7 }( ?' Y0 f
% u# D7 B0 |  E$ O/ P8 _3 P5 P6 X絕對支持啦
+ T! g6 I; C% M. ]& P, D
$ j& l6 \' e! }9 X1 Y2 x有錯就認,打就企定# U6 `4 X& p2 l* J0 d0 x4 q
& X! c' Y) \; T& I! e
無錯當然要撐到底, O: \1 t9 o8 k- z- q  L
, k* w( }7 Z; J8 B" m
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
) s  f. e9 q' F% [' C9 {" v8 W( S# u/ f1 g
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; e& q: `1 z" n! t
8 q5 ^0 O" L* }+ r" P4 n
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力9 A- w* F$ ~7 l( \
* e/ w& K9 c4 g/ k; r& c
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
# w& D% k4 l' o0 V
) d% e9 H, j2 ~1 l) X唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?, A* `9 R. k5 ?* m3 ~5 F# z) ]
! g: C  U3 c; x# f; W
我唔認為lor  d! f4 b, C/ z0 Q; u

" v7 W; z$ I. r1 L唔係話要整死佢地3 B9 l( v6 r3 w8 F$ y  ~- @

' a* N7 ^8 y$ Z. ~而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用* K8 x2 a* {$ C4 N6 I
0 m8 |7 t: P2 Q
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
9 B- u& ~7 b6 ^& e3 @1 ?& n
: t: B' ?7 e) R0 h6 v6 V# [有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
- L9 f3 d8 e; n& o3 G- }
+ w9 W! l" w, r  D8 D1 ?唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由3 L5 |5 H* U1 r& [

" |( h+ h6 I. F; s; Z( L5 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# O5 ~: z3 i, Q& y# D$ f' t' p
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"+ P/ B: A( B$ T  }8 {5 o; H( t

1 U1 B! `- M8 p  {! L. f! q- n我們的大學生
- h0 {1 S1 n% [( e0 [- m3 h
) n0 c% B2 l, X9 E; j5 B" Z, I" G2 G# F9 k' |
: G+ v; S5 {3 K1 \8 s" G+ Q1 d# x

% S) g. v! c1 T2 Q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
" g: `4 Z  O) m2 r+ |
9 e6 E, ~% j- V( @3 D2 r& n' f, C! m0 z9 g
有見地 !!!
1 Z6 X' d2 k( Q$ T: g+ X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
. _! R0 v* f2 p0 _& J" @  m4 c- e" R* ]+ D) q2 L
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
% r/ s) w7 z- c3 ^4 zI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. * Y/ ]1 O8 W5 j$ O
I pretty sad that about the University official.
3 K* w% b% T, b1 M& v# _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* ]4 c3 G) t" E) B' ?2 `

( H2 J* g: ?. a% [0 S: ^6 Z# B[ 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:
' _9 V2 v$ f, F. \& o: Y1 z& b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
' x# Z0 {: V# U& w% [6 n5 P3 m7 z4 ?% F8 \
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

# J3 O6 \; `$ e! I: u0 {
# d: }5 N9 Q- s) \% L兩者有何分別?( g7 V- p' g; _: @) C! C
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?