奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:/ v7 B1 m1 r7 M2 t  {! N, V
' x$ v: [/ Q9 `7 m5 n
agree,
4 R/ m0 m; D9 o$ _+ V! @. E我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
# T. V/ O2 j# n0 Z但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,% i8 ]* ]6 ], |$ M1 Z* T+ ^- M
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 [2 T" T1 u7 v0 f
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html0 X5 l% E% l3 G: X  f
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
; q3 c" I0 D" u' S. G# B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.
! b) b1 Y# I7 H2 F# C9 `8 r! o  C- JJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:5 y, ~# F4 f9 u4 Z: T5 l
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
/ C% z+ g$ f$ Y' j) l* ~, y- u0 c. c9 `/ j. t; N- E
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
) e2 {; L9 _6 Y! i- U% m5 n. R5 x/ R" i; n
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

; V/ t2 X6 K, y) R

- f+ Z5 }& v" ]' a絕對支持啦
* N% y' g9 ]3 n: ]5 `
2 O% V% v3 z" r9 s3 y有錯就認,打就企定5 n1 R8 t9 N) {- T
7 w( d: e3 ^; V: S1 ?) m7 R
無錯當然要撐到底8 I, m3 t9 t7 u; U

: o5 ]; X" ~; B8 C6 X5 T2 U但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩  H8 P8 E6 k; Y' `  ?$ e

# V2 E. {/ x6 N# _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
9 {) t2 e" d: Z3 L$ G0 C, H. }: F! T: e
: n9 v* m; f8 t4 l$ A2 ~0 H一份公眾讀物係好有影響力9 ]8 G% J7 |7 o1 r$ S6 B/ c

& P; n$ R. T& F. }' c. v7 J. ]我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
5 |2 o3 E" ^8 I$ P6 V6 E
& v3 O" S- n$ k, S- p唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
, Z$ r3 s3 P) Q
8 V7 F4 a) n0 k  e" m. Q我唔認為lor' L7 z7 i* Z0 Z9 I  E  V2 d

. f9 I5 w. B( x6 O0 l唔係話要整死佢地  K' r. B& [1 I$ k
7 h, p# }! `( X+ M' v' p( L2 N
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
8 C! _$ E8 K) c4 B9 P0 q" L" x0 ?6 ~! f4 G5 ^) q
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
: U# _$ B- G" _- n. _
: ^) G9 L' b' a! P! ?$ {( B5 g有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的! X2 i! p3 v) |4 Z0 L6 k
$ w9 Y& R9 A. I8 z# X0 B
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由6 d) B  C9 [3 D* b- [: r% x+ J* i6 z
, E* i  m; H" @! D* H5 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
$ u0 T6 {9 Z* c- q" t"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 \9 l; ~7 g9 u* x5 Q; A, d# P1 A

9 Z7 j3 Y; r5 w& |2 g9 g  G8 x我們的大學生) q% O; G' T" z

+ a5 f- G+ q3 q6 m2 T. e7 Q- f
0 t$ Z2 B; E1 \: N5 l5 e! J3 A- n  b. @7 z2 M% X! {
: s& L: Q7 Q) j

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:4 H4 Z! D8 I1 D" G: Z

" d3 S7 ^) l/ J0 G# \
3 _1 K1 M. `6 Y# d; I" n有見地 !!!
5 l! N* A: O1 K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+ c6 [8 \+ \/ g6 f" c" r

. O  W( f. M' K/ y; @I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. * q. C) X6 ~: \
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. * E8 H0 }7 @( r8 l  k! D
I pretty sad that about the University official.
+ J  J( {% A) _1 U3 u: OIt'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
; E: ]4 {$ P0 \4 Q2 d+ Y/ x4 s3 O. {  s  z) r& u
[ 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:
( ?" y/ N* }% E! q' r3 z. l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
* N8 u- a) Y; i0 A' L' l7 b6 `+ E* j( q7 J0 _4 @, F0 l
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

* o5 l' ~! _4 C7 A6 i8 y2 D4 i  i# L$ a/ H( F9 w; u2 f4 ?* g! S6 p
兩者有何分別?7 ^9 z  i" I) \. j- @6 g0 t9 c, K
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?