奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
4 c% Q  W( D6 {
. s7 O# P4 p* M" ~agree,+ ^2 Q: ?) z) |  @" v
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
, R! c) x" |9 |+ O2 ]$ i) j但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
; U/ C% \; x7 o0 h期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

/ a$ T) C2 e8 U7 q+ r) K7 N& I
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
; I3 a- y1 |% S$ f8 d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
" O7 Z, z+ Z9 F5 q6 }- i% a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.- [# k  L3 s/ ]% b
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:7 x( c- \) {2 [' x: b  v0 p$ G0 M6 X
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 7 Y& s" _* q+ _
8 c( i0 P$ `, g" L  e% u
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???" A  `( n# c* p+ ?% h+ W
  _. V5 L0 P+ _6 U0 T7 b" d
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

1 v+ Q' c- _( H  X) [

) i; D. b% _; e1 A. l. J絕對支持啦
% X* V2 O8 d- [1 F9 T9 r: Y- G4 c5 J3 d& T! s* z: ~
有錯就認,打就企定( e4 I! J7 J- _& B8 w1 q# h

5 ^1 _" |6 l+ m無錯當然要撐到底
6 b! W0 @" D, i6 D
2 _. m5 N' f! H8 w; k但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩# H/ i6 p+ M$ j

' B+ a* f6 e$ w7 p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/ O, T" ~" I$ v; s6 }( z
1 H3 c4 x6 P2 a, H
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力; L/ Q' g  s1 {! I* T! S

. D" T! {$ X, i/ j8 w5 K1 g我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
0 @3 K7 b  j: p3 o  V
" J1 C, E" E8 L- F. i' k* c; `唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
  Q2 k- S: x  V3 H1 d
, j: v- e) I* x: Z4 ?4 o我唔認為lor+ }$ A! o' A/ f3 l" H0 p) Q
& V) y+ n; g3 {% F# J! X
唔係話要整死佢地8 U+ s( D9 E: M/ z+ T8 a) C5 K

/ R2 W  f; H) t  F# \而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用. ^* L: C2 m, E+ h' [; A: Y

. a7 Y. P' {! y! f- Z) |) C* v我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大+ E6 a% q' ]' j: ^8 c/ p
: y+ m" D5 o- d+ E
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
1 i7 K1 ~$ u& m( z" Y
% W; c" |$ Z3 X( S# d! z% W, v唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由+ O) _2 h8 o* X4 r! x* h
# {" U+ Z/ ^7 }. I0 t
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
' m- _8 l$ \1 b4 f* 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"6 z$ `) I2 {" |: W  U' U, Y7 u

$ g) S" O* j5 x  k我們的大學生
8 F/ A0 @& m* j1 Z8 J$ S+ ^7 i- u
+ r! L! q) p' N1 u% }6 E  u% m% S, i! ~6 O0 y0 H

  g4 A3 X* Z% R: O! m) I4 ?3 P- z8 Z1 T$ X$ M# [

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:. M+ ?& e; r8 {" a

# R; w$ l& b& ^/ G3 _
1 [9 q. S3 S: D4 V4 t1 L有見地 !!!
% C8 w, k2 o) K. j6 V5 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
4 ~" t* F. \7 Z6 I, u$ P  d# L* I* \" l# y
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
8 [2 ~" N/ R" R3 WI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. % e* H# Z" D; t; V0 p" V3 _4 ]+ C
I pretty sad that about the University official.
" z0 ^: _5 c8 }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& b9 i: H) E7 t8 [
9 \9 D+ S1 R& ]
[ 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:+ p2 Q9 J6 ?3 `
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$ ?) P# v8 Y" c7 s$ C* s, n/ h: {# m

3 \* W* ^# a2 `, i) h( Z- q* i[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

5 K' Y8 g# I1 d  Z: A" E' ?) {$ y% _, b
兩者有何分別?
! t3 {2 s, H. S: }2 y3 e- S1 U中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?