奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
1 l! _7 C3 B( V0 i$ G% [* N8 P0 m: Q
agree,
2 G! `3 b3 j4 N" z我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
  I/ ]+ ]" U4 x) M5 r$ y但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
8 z4 v$ u! e8 V" q# c9 x' X期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

# Q- ~: T0 B3 f3 K! ihttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html, v* w, t: O  `( a7 [
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 x6 x6 o, P4 Q4 m" T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.- N; H) ^* K$ j: K) V5 l- c4 e
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
6 N3 N2 S( z; M有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
  m; [* B3 c1 _) O( ?# {4 q; V1 ^* k; v) i/ d$ W" V) y5 W
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
, t  x) ~1 b$ n0 X- _) g
" W+ u  A' R( k. U% }為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

' M8 H) `3 @) i6 N7 s  Q

6 U4 k9 u) X3 W- B% ?: ^- S絕對支持啦6 u/ N) r( J+ u
4 Q* e% d; K+ d3 Y4 v
有錯就認,打就企定
7 k3 V# P' c1 T4 ~8 b$ f! p; R5 u# u+ p8 ?# ?
無錯當然要撐到底
8 }' s- C# M& S* Q6 p; E. _% g* g
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
- e6 E/ d  U* T: I6 Q- o
! \' k1 h% I8 }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
8 V& K: N( F* x8 c5 f% q
+ L0 B0 e: d$ f; E7 L+ G一份公眾讀物係好有影響力, R, I) R& n0 b: x
) V. o/ c* P, a  g" Q  M' }/ {
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生* j7 w; L5 Q' w5 _2 @; A
* @) j- v# o7 @' W7 |, e) ~* ?7 Q
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?: D) ]! P; v: _4 T- G

& s8 R8 U& k4 C- {) p我唔認為lor
! b; N9 {$ G5 A6 [8 n! E1 G& g! w; L
唔係話要整死佢地
0 ?7 `; |9 ]2 Q! Y' F$ w( n3 L4 h# f0 s$ i% I
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
* W% z' Y8 f% _3 O$ g' A/ q( a3 _
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
7 N: q& ]3 o  r7 s0 n4 g6 e4 k% M  x( b) u1 [' {
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
0 d+ N& ?3 C. E, t+ y& m' Y+ y+ b. C; R" k% F( V; a2 ^; g% t; {
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由; U  [- Y! M; Y8 l" x9 T
0 R2 E" V, N3 Y. O. J( |( @( 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 U3 o* X; V9 h) |
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
7 a/ L4 {- f% d, f' G* r1 D2 W& D9 C1 ?; ~5 C+ e: X+ @5 K
我們的大學生
; r1 Q; ^! ]3 A, B* [& `( x0 T5 o) v& D$ i! o9 a

, r& E- a( q0 V0 L# n( Z% Z+ M6 W( w) f$ o( o. {- v/ x% g1 i; O
$ ]$ T% i' d& c1 b. E: K, v+ Q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:- o- O% C! R$ g9 U8 L: j  {& ~

. O2 h/ K) x* [% e# w6 i3 T7 F8 |/ w; y3 x# Q; R1 M
有見地 !!!
. C1 n. c+ B. L, K0 s) E, j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
6 o. ^4 q, C( g2 d: U3 H
$ |$ R! {+ f; G; t: I+ bI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
! O$ @0 I- W3 T; rI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
% k2 J. @1 R3 D3 yI pretty sad that about the University official.- d/ y- z: u/ s& y0 [( Q1 [
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
% s* P% b4 }  s9 [8 |: k( e  J3 P- B) 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:/ B" T9 |/ F! z4 ~7 h0 S
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# p5 U# O  K0 a+ H* f, v# I

5 }# s0 j( m7 I[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

9 }% D; ~, W' K2 D  P& a* l1 H/ l. Z' ^
兩者有何分別?
$ E3 C0 a/ r. N  Y3 h( [中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?