奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:5 Q% G  M7 Z: _+ T& p

0 a$ Y/ w& c' f* t) X( Zagree,; D3 e8 d4 a8 c/ f* z5 ^( m5 F1 @- U
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
+ W0 {) j3 M: N9 d) f1 a但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,  T3 i4 p" k  k" q* r( T
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

( ?2 v. n* I& `, p7 dhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
& n/ W( }$ ^$ b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8 ^% Z+ b) p2 F. Y- {# z; s( @
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.
9 [0 d% D5 C, NJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:' ~5 R- `9 Q/ D# d5 r1 E0 a
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ & P6 Z1 T; w( F
3 C' N( q- Y  c6 n
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???. S( J5 g  d5 y5 v! O
# c4 w' x6 k3 |# T( e
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

( s) ?9 d+ o+ ~, r
5 R: [" _3 W2 U絕對支持啦
0 p' U) K' ~* I/ h8 {2 d/ z7 W& G- K5 e" T4 R  u
有錯就認,打就企定& y+ r( `. c2 P. f1 v% ^  P

1 C9 m- g9 X' a+ _. ?6 O4 d無錯當然要撐到底# D& W8 e  h) H+ l+ x
( t4 @& C8 V1 o! G( Z/ j7 z) O
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩- d0 e$ p5 Q4 V, P0 o4 b' s0 g

% u/ w- n$ g9 G' x2 E! B/ M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* U/ t$ A7 m6 p1 [' u3 z4 `( R) E
, C$ q. |; ]* s; m
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
7 t6 ^' \) P' `( y
7 d7 O3 X  R5 X2 T我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
! Q7 o2 t1 B) e4 Y; z. `, L# V" r& Z& }: |; e4 L
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
3 X, i4 g' t# }$ _, Y* a# Y5 e9 I5 t, T+ B5 Q: J+ D4 \0 w
我唔認為lor, |, D. S' @' K- `* e
7 j& ?( }' o. K  [3 v& _7 ~8 V
唔係話要整死佢地
7 S% ~" R  _8 G7 K) n" z1 u' L7 E2 I: ^& D5 L
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
7 V$ B# X0 B6 ~! J' x7 _3 d
+ d( @% H# T1 C6 X6 K# \5 ]+ _我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大+ M; }. @8 b5 \
2 u: x6 b" f& a  m3 [% ~6 h7 {( E
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的  C* R4 N# Q7 W. ~  I: P

1 n5 H& p5 R( w0 d9 T: N唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由5 m2 t. g8 K9 A  L5 K& @

+ O2 _- Y8 a+ f7 E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
6 D  `7 }( S! O"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
; W: a( k: r9 l$ I+ q7 v
" s4 r" I1 T* F我們的大學生6 V* q% h& L4 ]5 }2 a

. w# c; f1 g1 ]. q2 ^$ t" K4 I, J* v% y! ~0 U6 w2 Y
# g) O# v! Y% H( R* ]! r& |; M! L

; R8 {+ `' T( Q- a# i" b4 d

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
3 u- v3 r. a1 V( y4 ~& z- y% ]% d3 _& E! y' b0 z/ j

( V4 U7 i& m8 j- p3 j- a有見地 !!!$ u/ u7 z7 z8 n2 }$ \( p( _9 v; v: y
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
9 K/ c. ?# \5 V
, b5 S: b" w4 w' D# d8 e/ dI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
+ H+ U* D4 ^2 S( C6 B6 aI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
3 X0 A8 |* K: q. F) E' nI pretty sad that about the University official.
  R- ?  |; K. B8 {, m7 SIt'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 la8 S+ P4 e- y. f6 o6 v8 ~, V/ _  e

) o0 R, g8 \$ R4 l. 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 17:24:0 A' R6 g5 M9 z
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  g( t+ h- M8 ~% U0 K0 y
7 Y+ m" U( B) h5 l5 F, I3 V
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

5 P( t! `, F& [4 H3 A

: p  u6 b. N2 w兩者有何分別?3 m& l* s  R5 }+ Q& h1 P  |# c
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?