奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:  |# E4 A. M* k
0 e# F( l4 g8 x/ Q% a- f, A
agree,
9 C$ d% B& k( O. V5 _+ F3 q1 y+ w我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,/ b3 [. F# ?5 X( N
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,+ e0 }. G, ^4 R% |9 [8 V' x7 I' T
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

& D4 S; |4 t" I; R4 _8 k
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
& c6 |1 q2 {; N) j% P6 v% [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( S3 k  h+ _& {8 x7 L$ ]
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.7 e5 t% i! q8 K$ B7 b: j
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
1 r! A* y! Y! M% v  s& n& S有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！   b+ y; f! ^- u( y
9 B- Y$ i! M$ B  y1 d& }
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???" O' R2 z/ C) n6 u4 p

3 E0 d/ b$ s# N; \: o為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

3 U5 O. D" ?* N: I7 H( M& Z5 D2 x/ @8 q6 x
絕對支持啦
; i$ H: y/ O7 m  \' c: u! l( r* W+ @9 W
有錯就認,打就企定
; j, T. Q$ U# V+ M7 P( K+ u5 p
) i/ _& g2 M9 x2 V  O2 i* V, y無錯當然要撐到底! `" P" T8 X0 r1 A/ ?& u0 |+ j# H, ]

" q2 ~. Q' i8 @5 G但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩5 X4 T7 X# [/ {& M  R7 ?* c

1 C- ~* [4 o' N) C& j! l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! f+ S( }- f: @- z8 {

# k, p' z! N: T一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
' F! R" O2 x5 W; K
; x: m/ g6 }- i; o4 w. H  h我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生! w# q4 a# [) x  b9 {
! ?% I- H& I' D( s( Y2 K
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
" `, S& q$ F0 a& @
. {# W! K- U+ c5 A0 I5 o我唔認為lor- Z  \4 Q; s% i* P; @5 |2 d; }

& O; {: {5 i2 X9 d, R+ n; w唔係話要整死佢地5 B1 x2 \, p9 x# d

, a9 }' g9 \6 h( p" i* f" f而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
' M! V( x' J: N( G, w. k: z! B# v$ x& \  Y3 q0 I% v+ I/ J0 T
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
) Z2 U, y2 I* g- l6 e2 i) Q6 b0 k4 f" U* h
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的( ^/ T# u* {3 c% h# ^
" V, z& q6 m$ D. q9 U' Z& f
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由7 A9 S( m7 \0 K2 w8 [* p8 P( F
0 v$ O4 U6 D2 z! h7 ?1 [9 H" i; `( y
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
1 i# X9 J/ J4 X6 ^1 F/ n"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 P3 z6 Z. Y' {2 B0 v
, L3 m/ d$ v1 d( ]: L3 x
我們的大學生
5 p& k# ^  G+ j  r3 |; f3 q, ?& P
5 S, N( u5 y: ~& B1 D
: q3 q& y6 w% G9 G5 J1 i# m; }( r; j- c0 B2 n
  C9 B) H7 Y, I" Q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:8 b0 }) r7 k. ~9 N  O
* s3 m8 L: c9 z( s

! R' S: c6 N) o( J1 ~有見地 !!!/ q! Q- w2 g3 N5 @2 w+ y' e  b, l
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 P% ?* ?3 U" ]: d- K' e3 M+ x: L5 g( S$ l" z0 U1 s3 y
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
3 F/ V" h9 I, y* \' Z; fI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ) v9 W4 d. g# ]% j( S1 m$ \
I pretty sad that about the University official.8 ^) u8 \; n1 p! |2 k- t
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 la8 L" j0 ^8 h) l: f6 Y9 E( M2 H3 u

2 [- A. ~2 Q" X( m" 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:: Z, W$ L5 K4 |0 Y* s2 M9 ?7 p4 e  R
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
. i# t' a7 Q& h0 u, }8 K
. ~2 B- V, X: V+ Z9 o5 k; C+ L[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

( \# Y  v6 i5 S$ o" u7 b7 q! q6 V0 W+ r) U! D8 J1 ^* x
兩者有何分別?
& h/ Q/ Z  q! `. k1 w. ]( k中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?