奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
/ V- y- d' e$ q+ ~0 Y( f" F$ T
# k# v: F+ z% e: l- V6 uagree,4 @* |# U3 c- Q. k9 {1 H# _7 R! C
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,3 p6 G4 S6 h2 Y6 c3 B
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
! o% B, j  j- J7 u# W期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

% r6 Y: w3 h/ }& |5 q1 }& @& @http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html) g. s# e2 i/ t( W4 u2 W7 z4 ^) h0 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8 Q6 s* L3 o8 v5 ?
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.
, r7 G8 N4 u$ |  U1 fJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:! h) E9 h. |+ t7 b3 x
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
7 r2 a. L# e! h) _
2 a. ?; e! E$ b& F' s係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
* c8 c) h( v7 `- z+ m# H, M  Q  b. F7 A4 C/ {( M
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

( L8 T( [" D) o0 X9 Y* P9 R3 Q+ u* g4 O/ q/ N4 Y7 t9 a0 v0 i1 @
絕對支持啦
) G& d% o) x$ Y* Z" ?
% i# j1 W# Q9 m9 f有錯就認,打就企定1 n; b9 d- @. Q$ w
  X' {) Q( c* f" O$ K% g1 C
無錯當然要撐到底
0 o7 i: B6 l1 c1 u2 \7 M
" I! ^* P% q, u: s2 f0 O但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩! g, F/ |; ]! a' ^0 O" w$ Y6 K% z% i
4 h0 N, T& N9 s. [2 X4 {) v2 v
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
$ @( ]0 @( |; P8 u0 `/ [- z( N: F5 Z. w6 u
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
5 Z. I( \! b" I+ ^( M9 ^. K- [& o  _8 j+ ^
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
. k' W  L" E/ D; X+ u4 ^; ^% F4 ?( G: @
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
1 v; b9 ~' ?" ~' B0 j2 V4 L( x+ ]9 [2 L7 @& P
我唔認為lor
5 p$ K) c$ F( a1 Z/ v8 L0 |# b
0 @( k9 U7 b3 ?1 M2 J0 Q4 z8 z9 ]唔係話要整死佢地
8 }/ D+ i  f- O9 d5 j$ B2 o" I, o" J. [) ~
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用, }+ K9 z! E4 |7 ~" \1 \2 }$ s

( H* X& W; R" O% g我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大; Z" a$ X7 A( ^& [$ `2 v
- L- c6 m! L# F- o; @
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
# N) b. u/ t) z% u! k
/ L( [% C# U- n/ V- B唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
$ U4 {! b) d& Y" s% x# `% U8 \- \. e
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 v3 P! Y3 E3 e) E* A1 ~$ O
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
" |; N' ^' ]$ L/ v2 J6 N& r7 x& n0 M1 O9 N' K6 {9 H' ]; _' N
我們的大學生
# q% M8 \  W5 n; e9 B+ p: D% j" w9 D; A$ j8 u

2 Z5 l8 f+ k' ^! y' [6 b9 F: C# G7 K( z; U8 [

; q5 c: n1 ~* X. K* y& z

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
$ g2 y/ R7 S! u# i' X8 }9 b/ i$ Y1 V% |6 R  p% K" |) K9 ]  `
! B2 M* k/ Q' U
有見地 !!!
6 `/ x- l- S* `  T% 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
" w* A3 E! Y( t0 h8 ?+ u% |
: @. z& J& h& X2 J, s0 U' d* SI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. ; ^$ w0 _) T. X$ [4 |! e
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ; L1 @* l6 O+ _' f7 F
I pretty sad that about the University official.
/ [" S9 _) u$ }  ]- rIt'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
3 p6 n" d6 m4 b! d/ i
: y) I3 H3 T# B7 W& R2 f[ 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# F; }! x  D0 r4 n2 Z( w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 la0 Q$ P( U. o! N) f( A2 x

4 W) l6 A2 E! ]- M6 D[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" q- h. E. Z# P9 U2 b1 t5 i$ Q; G/ K& Z* f7 \
兩者有何分別?
3 M& H& N& u7 J: x中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?