奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
4 A9 B1 Q1 Z/ f/ W* a! P- y6 X2 x# ?5 U8 m6 s
agree,
4 E# E; r) d" m' a我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
8 ~  g7 V. o/ e4 V2 [; U但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
+ u# E1 w3 d! ^期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

- J8 }/ W& U3 y6 t8 Ihttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
8 q0 J( a! N" D; F3 q% p: 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6 R$ Y. ^, M( p8 R
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.
' ~# |% n( J  B  EJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:; n8 ]+ V1 k) K& q
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ - O! p# P; n- c) ^
  d' g+ y" _) f% D) M5 w. D4 E  H
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
! \7 H6 T. _( ^: n9 R% @4 y- G" l' a5 L% F# P$ U
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

) L, W6 C! T8 |* @# X5 \7 H3 v) K
3 F9 i& _; a5 [( @" j
絕對支持啦
4 y( e0 f: {( Y2 I
. @- O2 T) }$ S, ]# ?有錯就認,打就企定; {6 K. j3 |. k

5 H! }% z) u+ e" E/ `7 q5 B* n5 u無錯當然要撐到底% Y! A4 y( [1 h5 v0 o* w
; z2 s3 K! B" D5 u
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
. U( I. J2 H) f6 p* h% D/ o, U4 d6 P4 A) H% p/ J
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/ M1 \  |4 p% c- T& {& D

* b! w4 T3 z5 f9 I; ]& U一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
" K- G; t6 t5 N" y. q- {5 k5 A: ^$ l6 P) r( b
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
, N0 B, |1 a4 g0 Y+ ~% C  _7 l( I# k/ @' }. I8 O! _3 a( i
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
! S" V4 }# \6 X4 D
9 M# Y. b9 U% G我唔認為lor
7 _6 Z( ^4 ?2 U0 Q; M
: {6 \: T% B0 r- g$ Y* d8 A* H唔係話要整死佢地
% i( H% o! [/ I# c9 K' n# M
/ E& R7 v8 b. ]5 M而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用+ b/ w; x6 j$ h+ P# h

9 c" }- W/ G6 d0 r0 P! L3 _0 A4 ^我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大# i6 H1 O0 b1 E- |0 {# z8 x' d
: J# r5 Y; E3 {" U: J# Y( P0 {5 r
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
7 Y7 n7 s1 i: f. v9 ~
+ ^  J) s' M7 l. |. g4 |- ?唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由; h4 L# {: D) y' y* r

8 j1 a6 M2 d: V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" G% J% x/ R+ i0 t2 `
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"+ b( M/ V1 o% Q& R7 y0 j& V. V

: i" Q: T1 Q' {我們的大學生
. ~% d' t/ X! b! `# r$ M' n
+ Z2 {" J+ q- U' C4 |6 Y6 n9 X% L$ c7 @2 _$ @

2 z0 ~) [0 l: t' i
- g4 e/ `: v% e" t

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
' {& E$ [* H* d3 n# h% ^8 b. r# X7 F
/ y+ q* q, J* f
有見地 !!!) N  Y/ l4 q# d/ U' g
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  Q7 h, k( G2 e  C# c2 N; j
0 S3 }9 y( A/ z: h1 m5 X
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
6 d* l) B5 U6 k. d+ H6 s5 U0 KI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
, I4 W. m( f# r9 F# m( II pretty sad that about the University official.
% r: @2 D8 |0 S! h7 N* s. D! DIt'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! a! P! u# z# \6 l

$ W2 ?  c+ Q5 V& ~9 \$ k! 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 17:24:2 x1 W- D% }8 u0 v0 v
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) M% t0 @  W7 v, O
9 z/ h+ \: w0 J
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

+ C5 S+ I  y6 D( c& q. E0 y
- p  Z# @5 s: g2 q: L兩者有何分別?
6 G: j) r' N) s6 _2 p( n$ g/ [中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?