奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:+ q3 N: y4 \' S+ d. P1 Z: `4 s

. E: B0 p# E9 n+ v: U7 nagree,& t  ]7 t' N* Y) t$ ]4 ^! B
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
: B1 a7 z; [. I9 E! m但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,3 N! g* s( c/ |3 T! @
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

* C1 M! q! C- u9 j1 Chttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html) c2 O8 `+ e. g1 F
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
3 [2 p+ {0 E& x9 Q: m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.
" b1 u1 z2 }% a$ ~  r8 G4 rJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:0 H7 b) [5 Z  n
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
1 \$ E6 a, \/ d, }# J8 i- M. i3 S5 B
( y- E5 L: Y9 Y5 s) U1 b7 j; [係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???2 R# U: L2 }+ p' Z9 R- U
+ t$ s/ t4 ?' }, L& S+ j
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

6 H, q' n4 P# A2 Z" S- X- w6 _* k6 G
絕對支持啦! T5 Z8 L5 V+ e2 C  Q- k

6 w! l/ O  O$ h3 ?$ k; `; J有錯就認,打就企定5 B  k7 ?! Y) y" O

* N9 Y2 S) P. u  e2 i無錯當然要撐到底4 `- h- I, P4 H. o

% n' o' G" \" p1 G; c但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩" Z5 u( x1 M( t

2 g# P7 j: T# h. R) B3 @9 L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' v, D$ I4 H( N- Z1 T! n

8 [4 C- H# {0 q( _. D一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
. l. d) Y6 j9 u( d& d6 {, W
/ d0 D+ E, A' R( I1 N我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
; \3 _0 z1 z4 X5 K! a8 f' y2 y2 f& d5 @- p4 J" P
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?6 c- A$ r) N# T8 w/ V+ w7 s
& a6 l% W$ ?- G3 S: y* `5 F
我唔認為lor
( q& t8 E' @' ]
5 t3 a7 B  `/ r, d6 t: R+ ^, u$ Z唔係話要整死佢地5 k+ j6 ]. R! o8 f* i
' s: l) D/ P: |6 k/ ]. P# `
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
/ v' j( t  c; |8 ]6 C
( O8 ~7 f% e$ l2 D我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大6 T  }* {8 W, n1 j+ N' U5 u
9 s8 B+ F" u5 P4 ^; O7 ^
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的  k* {* @% ?" C+ @: X
9 W0 g- }1 Y4 x. b) R
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由) e: |, T4 _3 V4 ?
  R8 p9 z: n2 h* D5 r) \
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. A" u! M* U0 G
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"2 j$ H/ E* s9 n# Z& t, \
# r1 g! U' `( O9 Z) R' K
我們的大學生: a4 _; o2 Y. ^7 m2 X

. Z+ s4 S, r- e: z  P6 _) X* m+ U) O% S& Z, K
2 s4 U3 R0 Z/ ?# L2 o1 d. }6 A
9 ~+ k- c- D+ p9 D& F

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:" X5 o$ E9 P9 o/ m' J; D. L
' E0 E% i" P: b; @) b+ r! Z

; P' _( P% z; o) }0 a! m有見地 !!!
4 s; n* \( W  @$ B) q1 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.html
. r0 b  I0 a0 n, d4 t% i6 X
$ c2 P, N- c( yI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. * d, f8 W$ f) M0 ?( V) v
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 C9 T# {' Q/ v: ^5 t
I pretty sad that about the University official.
& [/ v- r% N3 W7 J4 K+ o$ jIt'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. R) M7 O; w* l; C
  Z  u3 M/ X% A( t  [9 t
[ 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:
* M0 E4 b5 V9 E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& R, M8 [; K& C& {6 H

0 |$ H! W) c$ e1 D$ r6 w9 X7 ]/ e[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

8 |5 Q: B) ^6 t- |
; b# a% r! `, |( ^1 o
兩者有何分別?  s9 D- z5 z& z- @4 ^: w
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?