奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:3 V- `3 M# [, D2 K/ x/ ~: g
1 C% q5 ?5 h# B
agree,: u3 Q0 I- ?& a0 ^; k
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,9 i: ]/ E- K# {4 |8 ]  f" d
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
- k( n# p8 L! ^3 q& T4 j) n期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

: ]+ k2 o- m. h/ T2 g7 Z7 {) [$ thttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html7 \5 K. Y6 m% n8 j9 w
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
( t6 P1 Z7 e( g) h$ m; b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.0 P8 I: f0 ~4 ]
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
* S7 Y  E5 C$ ?有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 3 d3 V" X7 X( \- V' A
( i" Z& @7 ]+ T2 U) ~
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
/ F" S: I4 g, ^5 i4 N" y. W  G. }; ?4 E
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

7 M$ M- X* f+ B) I& j, M, P7 r# |

. g! `, g& m2 n) y# H' b絕對支持啦
% A! F. D: V* g  A. Z* ?" w
/ b! ]$ v5 q# N有錯就認,打就企定
+ [6 R* H: E6 `+ f, D+ D# |8 m4 m, W- g
無錯當然要撐到底, n2 \5 v( `* C0 \6 M

- n$ o  [* F( s7 ~. W" E  k但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
  u+ H* m+ D0 u. T6 o  A5 R
4 R" r  P% F0 b  k% S% 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9 i; n6 P6 q) L2 T
- D. V0 H' m. Y1 e
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
! b* f8 a5 L+ ?. b2 `) r" R, F- Y' h7 i" _
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生! H7 i" b' ^& R+ i0 g# J

$ u; J+ H% C- V4 D2 D唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?% d: m; [7 B4 p

' e/ c/ E* Y, T9 ]( E我唔認為lor  H$ |3 z4 _, D  K0 r$ p" Y: r

. r$ [, R; L+ S! E唔係話要整死佢地7 b& |! I" L+ m: l2 Q
4 \: A0 [: u$ |, M
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用7 R" n1 t7 m7 O# g
4 c# M) l5 }8 W& J0 g
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大; [; a; k7 }$ y2 Z) }# |$ M

: o; S& P/ [) h" [2 j有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
/ [/ x, y' h& w2 n; c8 _
' K3 L8 F' b' [唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
! i1 Z* H% r, H. n$ G# j; k5 G( g' T( P4 c8 J  w/ R: T: w5 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
5 q  u5 t* ~4 m2 a2 u$ _% E7 D"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非": S9 X3 v  W6 q5 R9 [9 ~* d& ?( u
) P8 Q+ @& c% D1 G
我們的大學生7 }5 U: W: `$ m$ X6 f

9 B% o6 e+ N7 y9 A' ^5 m( P( }% H% x0 R* x
$ a* Z0 L, v( F. P4 N: `
  l- @( f9 ?. ~. `1 H, }  r5 r

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:1 W: f9 Z$ f/ D& s
( n/ i/ k8 Y$ A+ j' L' [1 p
7 Y/ W; S& U3 H
有見地 !!!& o' H) z. k' 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: ^, r/ Y! e9 V7 ?
' L( u' o1 C% H* C" \, J
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 9 H3 j$ Q( b- O6 ]
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
  }0 ~. ?* s/ lI pretty sad that about the University official.! c8 \7 g0 l. n0 }. r# L
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 la6 X1 J! @4 A' s3 \4 j

& B% v' ]) G$ ]! G2 `* Z5 U; A[ 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 y7 l% U# u. k7 v! a& W
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 w  C, _' e- F# \' w3 {+ U8 s
( X8 N8 l. Q( ?0 Q. c/ N[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

- I7 ^( ~  x- M8 |# L' u0 ^* N) D* o$ l  m4 P  B3 ^9 Q
兩者有何分別?
7 a$ G; Q% `) Z$ Z- S7 N# T8 K2 S中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?