奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
, u3 i3 b$ g( }. R- \) c6 ~' j) [- [$ Y! g  n3 R3 [
agree,
' [4 B& p' u, G7 c我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
' e1 z; v* q0 _! e+ n但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
& i4 }: a7 @$ e- P: I9 [, e期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

, U/ Q1 U" m" w6 y( R' {. X! _4 |. v
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
; K1 p' L" T- R8 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9 K7 R+ T, [% ~7 M+ c7 r7 W4 k
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.
" v" v/ B/ S/ M: k/ A3 D+ z" i4 VJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:- j1 n6 d* g- V) C3 C
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ - V* `2 R% `& C5 h% `/ J1 r
' K' A/ d6 L1 |. e4 s
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
5 W) d3 \/ w2 P- D& N$ U: F2 y& T. X1 g: |+ \2 j
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

5 Y/ Z1 W2 _2 V0 N+ u9 e6 @6 R  [9 `3 S* g9 h) ]
絕對支持啦
' V& v/ z- x/ x; A- T) a
" b7 p! ]  `+ k! K* F9 L; ^$ y( o有錯就認,打就企定
  l0 U* l. \' `# L$ i- M( @9 k5 ?" N" ]) c9 F+ h1 Z. D* a8 w; A
無錯當然要撐到底! k9 K% Z. I* x+ }
( n" P2 M& b6 y  L1 P0 B
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩4 Z* l) B4 [. h% E0 V
7 m" @/ L7 I6 h# q$ p  x% i
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
4 u' O. v+ r' m: T
9 g5 @2 a" u9 J一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
9 R* y2 o8 {* i. ^! p2 \( w- f2 l. b% b7 T% s
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
0 q$ ?! c! Y# J! ?9 C5 T2 w2 u, e9 f
" a$ g% M8 U3 c& {2 h唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?% R$ R1 v4 R, T

" z/ p2 z5 ^* K& R6 e' y1 d) |% a' V我唔認為lor- y2 h2 \- ]! x( |; d, _
" c1 T' \% @8 U1 y( Y, J
唔係話要整死佢地
  n7 D/ a. \3 J6 B1 h2 _8 k6 m
# w8 v# F. g* M, Q& W% V而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用- F4 p( C: y* f; l5 m( x& z7 b: c  P
4 X" C4 S  k6 Y0 A! m. b
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
" g3 g6 P) ~5 Z! R# t( b. N% D) d/ L+ T
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
, W- X1 n+ O* U4 E( T  |% C- G) e8 L; p) `" I
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
7 Z3 K9 }" u9 `7 M& k4 G* v+ K: z( X
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  w$ _. ^) e+ z: p1 v8 `1 ]
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
, k. z: u: ?0 b- M# @& t0 i& w3 q! J4 P1 ]- e
我們的大學生  G$ e5 |" d; u2 I& ^  D2 _: f0 Q
. [% ?" A" ~: E
) t( B0 q# P2 n+ }1 O5 A
) T. K3 g* |3 x+ H/ p0 o6 @

9 Y0 ~8 H$ U6 o; O  S3 L2 M- j: ]

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
) H# F/ M1 u$ ~/ k0 ?
) j) [9 D* j: Y/ e$ Y3 |' a; O+ c
8 a. h# }6 y% T4 M: w, i  m0 `$ s有見地 !!!# D2 ~6 W* I8 U6 I( v, d
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' @& X* J) q0 e7 o3 a+ E  j* i

! h3 A" `) S( Z* ^I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
' c* c2 r' z" p  Q( @& AI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
( J- I% p9 O0 r- L( s. gI pretty sad that about the University official.* S9 H) D( T8 c% v) c
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 la) G. G5 q& Y, _
( n' m6 K! P" C
[ 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:
% r7 B1 P9 w$ A  S  |5 U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
( a8 s5 f, T, B& w7 G$ t
& G# ]/ K, t. O[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

: c; f: Z9 s$ P8 O# ]  S1 g: b/ F+ v5 R9 ~
兩者有何分別?
0 r" ~2 ~! M) u$ {- l中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?