奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:, v4 I( c- ~% O4 e! w# b5 T( J$ f3 n

* W; p2 @8 p" Yagree,
( T0 C* v8 t- ]0 d. {5 Z( j我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
* r) G3 ^, I" j7 a* C) k# q' I但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
! X. I: v" `) E! Y期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

( r3 N% u8 y( u1 c
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html( `. |( T2 m+ `+ v* |2 ^+ n
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
( K  y6 {/ W2 c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.. U' y) f( F4 Y! Z6 T
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
) }5 }; d: N0 N% S" K/ i2 {有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 2 Z) r; p& P' E' f

" d7 X- s  Y" T; q6 B係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???5 I. \$ d- O. N& F, ~8 w

8 B7 m# |6 e% O6 N5 v6 Q為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

9 F( P3 D' p( i0 z5 F( [! ~: }1 V! d5 [. p0 w) M6 O7 k
絕對支持啦* P$ z; Z% r! t; n

& S* O' Z0 E" d. _9 Q有錯就認,打就企定
1 g  _4 S% d: S3 K" [8 u4 D" e" r: c2 @4 U- P
無錯當然要撐到底  s$ X( R3 h$ @9 o7 O6 ~+ a
! L' e& C+ _8 A7 f2 Y
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
1 @( z( q0 g# f- n! x, n: [8 s: K& w  @) h" [* Q
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
' L% o; l! G! D# t: R* R
- L2 j8 x$ l5 w, P6 U) K一份公眾讀物係好有影響力- h6 c3 C$ U" _# t' v

4 f0 ^% u& F* p( F我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
* }8 W7 E; Q  g: Z% Q" b4 x9 u* ~$ T+ M$ r
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?3 g  u* P) h8 h4 W

) G$ s* B- Q+ F; v0 q我唔認為lor
* t9 Q0 g! K$ Y( r# }
7 h. x0 u8 c9 y" @唔係話要整死佢地
$ _5 v  L8 r: H8 `$ o/ I( R$ P
2 @9 R, P$ o2 d而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用9 I  c( Y8 ^3 u# ?& l. M5 r- b

6 q# I& S/ z9 A. N. {! @6 D. ]我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
' h/ t3 s: F" S# y6 J/ `9 q! O0 R4 @# C2 D+ j1 o' s
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的( z1 L: {; ~' X( M
5 d/ }$ R8 z, c" b) |
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由% a" P* q2 l9 R$ s, G2 J3 P

6 ?( B7 F& _$ `9 w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/ f9 T9 E6 @& {- v* l  W
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"- t) Y( _2 f: d4 f& s( S1 M0 Q5 _

. Z. `$ D3 r5 |我們的大學生
% n1 J- w3 P; X6 p* |5 t  ^6 ^% c9 J
2 b- ~9 k$ U' U

+ Z/ f1 w8 {" D0 O6 |
0 E0 U+ M& D: n" t

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
2 o1 V# }. c- j; W: O( R* ~+ {+ }3 H: c8 p* b

. I; ^: R( t! }+ B. a, b1 V有見地 !!!. c; C5 h7 E# ?) U
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
, w* r. p2 f* K+ ?7 e9 m, o( Z2 c& a; l- [* r7 G
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. & ?4 d4 J4 y: g% ?' b% y. H2 C
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
4 ^$ O! t7 \& ^0 ^& C, u9 II pretty sad that about the University official.
4 p& p' \  r) a4 {% W) S2 t5 G8 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, {: E8 ^$ H7 i5 {& q+ _& Q

  N0 t% f$ ?9 x3 @" Z+ M' ][ 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 17:24:6 {$ k$ U6 i# |* O# m% J
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 la1 `3 [& S, f% G: \* x4 J

# g9 O! U. _$ J% P[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

5 `. C6 o, o7 i  N5 e* q' f& w) `6 ^0 Z0 _2 w7 z2 M
兩者有何分別?; q6 A; L, R: C: C
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?