奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:9 s5 K6 r1 O2 y1 |
4 O  ]/ W9 k$ t, e( i6 J- M
agree,
8 c( z2 c  }' D' X1 o1 K+ x我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
0 H4 T; t* o4 ~但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
; V9 {" B  Y2 l期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

! j6 f+ o7 r9 X$ k% c
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html: d: S. @* J% a3 x# z/ O$ q8 V+ R9 b3 }
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
) P) T$ p9 f; `  f$ B, O# I. y* ~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.
8 d- {( p* Q) M) m* ]% p& ^  h) JJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
& {  C) }4 T! Z" B& x8 v有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
1 V. v1 o0 s: I& U8 a% }$ N6 a- \+ J. b. V0 S
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
7 n  @6 p6 W; \3 s/ _
  R; G! Z& ?0 G# D" w為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

% N8 ~4 w& i% h- a

, F4 |$ g3 |! `9 c$ f5 `- Q絕對支持啦; U* f1 z' _9 Q0 P( q9 d/ Q# N

$ u- O) x7 ~+ s" {7 s3 s有錯就認,打就企定6 c: ^# W/ D! N4 ?9 Q

" |4 l  b( l8 W4 j- ?  Y1 ?/ a% h無錯當然要撐到底- n& F+ E2 ~4 e8 C2 ]  E& D8 n
$ L( Z9 J% H. Q4 [
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩4 M# T! G3 ?& B: \8 t

: g. _; M) M3 K2 H* K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
  k/ m+ t: T/ `7 }, w5 r. o5 _+ {; y0 k' M
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
/ s* S7 `3 V* E% T- w1 N% ~( G" {) j
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生( @7 w9 [0 n$ {# O. D

3 u7 p1 Y: n6 Z唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?  ^) x- g( n' F" Q: v5 s

. s0 e2 L$ g& b我唔認為lor
+ c+ \/ m/ T0 N# m* w' \9 X7 y6 o" W+ H/ n3 g6 z( ~( V
唔係話要整死佢地
" {6 \) l7 h* ?6 a
$ Q7 a+ ^' z2 e而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用7 W7 K* G0 a$ o: E$ q) O! j+ g

) }" {6 K! C* ^; l" g; {, S( ~我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大! G( L6 h: @" @% N2 {

) [6 B) ?( T9 P, g! r) C; `8 N有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
1 [* X" b' x  V4 B6 Q, a, M1 z0 j; d7 r, D9 N0 E, x
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由0 `# R, w+ b. _% d* A
; L9 p  z7 Z2 A! i$ K2 q
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3 E" K3 V9 N) `7 ~6 O+ V
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
- D/ ^8 G$ Y& e1 U; s- t, |  R! B5 P2 U6 M! n; j, k4 x
我們的大學生
+ O, p$ d9 w8 ~
+ J  F  d1 i* o9 i2 ?
" U  }4 [# A  f- }+ s: @' @+ w, Q: U4 T3 ~' S

8 n$ J% \! c7 L4 s) U- Z, G, S

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:; p2 g+ h3 s. v, M8 ^+ [4 ^# e1 z0 b
! n5 H- `- x( D  F# l
0 D1 j  u5 P$ D. B$ T6 T) A
有見地 !!!1 R1 }" a3 Z$ M% r
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
* N9 s; j: I; D, w5 b; J
) G' h; D% W/ f6 v$ c, H& X" II think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
* \6 ~, B3 {0 D0 j5 Q. i; |I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
+ g7 W( i0 L  F' w) s) \I pretty sad that about the University official.
/ v0 u7 s7 k# @  b: w; T$ h# fIt'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* K, n. H5 r; D! E+ a
! J: h4 S2 G2 \/ V1 Y1 m8 W2 ?/ Q4 j
[ 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:
7 Q- c) Z* h! T- s5 z  L' I* Y, M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# N/ h1 t* w/ ]2 w( n0 h

9 d5 \; {3 i/ y$ [, ?$ r0 `[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

6 d& q% O9 u- L! r  v. Q

/ B" `; C& M. B# ~兩者有何分別?
0 ~0 j- _# B% ^* H8 n中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?