奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
% U" [- y' X- n* Y0 F
5 m$ `  b, e- c  yagree,
7 O' H# s/ B2 h' F1 M我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
8 [0 d  B. a* v- @& ]但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,. r1 C6 M  `. `* _- X& h. v8 B; D" U
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

% e' u8 Q) F: f+ n+ N
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
2 @! `2 r$ j, O' l. k7 C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# d& J7 d2 o" S; n
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 r5 ?; x) J) p: @0 l
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
8 J: x+ j: G, ?4 y" C* B有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 2 w2 U- v4 M5 S* F- @2 i
6 _9 v* U' V+ q6 D" h' y
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
/ B1 Q* U  w* ~7 X3 q' Q  h: W7 G* q8 ]" E4 G5 o
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

+ m! g  P* y  }
. ^4 ?: T3 D/ [0 i絕對支持啦* G6 J1 a1 ~( ^
$ B. d- s2 G' C& F
有錯就認,打就企定
6 Z. a: L9 Y8 |. O' y/ O# e3 s; p. C: h* ?
無錯當然要撐到底) S9 i5 F: _. K* n, _

3 R' D$ E6 p0 s但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
0 ?' J. q3 W2 k3 q" P* z9 ?" T' V7 u7 J0 o! M$ Y
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/ l( w3 V4 ]; L3 \9 C- p

7 w' a- L) D+ T$ O( ^8 K$ F* x一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
! \+ T& n  T9 o% I: H8 x8 b9 Z- J, J5 _, ^  q6 n. h
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生7 n( J) _2 ^, ?7 f6 @
1 m8 U* h+ \9 L
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
- |1 I! R  h  r4 e. R# m1 @$ u
+ H( M4 M1 I0 C1 }$ `我唔認為lor
2 k  k7 {; M4 ?: S; X2 ?+ v
9 y& i) v& Z. K2 |4 z5 R, H唔係話要整死佢地. C. T. x, W& _: T/ m
, v6 C4 F  a$ |! m
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
" j9 Y& G) A* C" I( X) M
; {) K5 p0 J. n1 G6 I我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大2 f3 g  Q  Z# y' `0 K! d( _
0 |' Q8 Q: T  x7 O: ]9 e5 D
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的$ a' w2 q* F, Z4 \0 D6 }0 l

8 y. Z* I0 T7 G+ \: Z6 f  W0 E) ^, ?唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由: _. b" [0 ]4 i; J! S- p. W* ]% I
9 l, B8 R# U- a& M4 B$ N
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2 Q  T; ^( G0 I9 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"  K# m  d* w2 K7 E3 d

) Z. Y2 D; C# o6 K我們的大學生$ G* |: I: w( t& X/ H# [

, ~6 V0 T" {$ J) H6 {- ]: E3 w% _5 s& G- `2 }

1 Z' ^3 o* B8 d, G/ L! U  ^
) p2 m- |" v  u+ c5 m7 n

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:/ a* h' ^; g! {8 E
+ ?$ y/ r+ h+ G8 b6 }

! B5 {( u: M3 e+ p有見地 !!!
+ B6 t) k0 m- S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.html6 A8 ^7 n: x2 t
$ ~( T! f( w  p- q2 j8 ?
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. / R  Q  J, y5 D( W2 {* B
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.   L# [* S3 L% T
I pretty sad that about the University official.
) a1 h, V; V2 U7 z  r0 NIt'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
, ~0 o1 S9 v) q# _6 p. x
7 _8 V  ~" V% m[ 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:
5 f* a9 z0 a% R1 @1 H6 _2 h7 o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, @8 u$ X& T5 y, L! @+ P- r8 J
/ t. ?5 Y& b5 Y" |% A& R4 v& s
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" G) @; U; c3 `2 z  Z7 M
0 @+ C% w- H% X: N. D1 X兩者有何分別?
% O, T2 J( k" A7 N中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?