奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
. T) A3 H7 Q6 k
4 f- a! U! Q7 J& z" magree,& K5 W3 M  o, G1 G; Y" O, e
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,2 B5 p0 G2 H! Q  W
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,4 G  f6 j6 [- W
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

) c" t! U& L# Y  {  K
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html' B1 r! ^- M4 h6 S1 n  i
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
* J) a! r: o! G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.
0 ]! z, L2 y% b5 e+ ^Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:% n! z% A3 D1 U! r5 L, R& E
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ * m8 {5 W/ e% c2 ]' h" h. G( C
( L% q$ u  S( f  y  B) T0 U) Y
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
5 V- p! @3 T3 a0 \! E
1 E+ t4 T8 @( b為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

1 o* ~  i2 t2 r1 s# e3 r
+ I$ w: v& m5 j! I0 O
絕對支持啦1 R, _! D- ~# s& ?+ l- ~5 n8 J! b
, A: Q0 Z+ e! T" u2 N
有錯就認,打就企定' M9 y0 t3 a3 R7 X3 d, b

# E# A, M" a- `! ^9 [' B, T$ M無錯當然要撐到底- {$ U8 D7 f7 ]& t
: N$ ^) c% E$ C. n
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
5 @  F- Y" Z) x) u9 V
8 r; c) U4 j5 @% D: _$ |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1 q: i5 A7 f7 P1 o% [: S
- m% G3 g0 n) }+ B" l
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& }2 U7 r1 z; w8 F3 U3 a" E
1 @1 B  m- N6 ?& c! C* |: G8 }5 l1 ?, s
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
* w) U! x7 i& S! h0 G& F9 r- u  x% _
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
/ E; U3 h+ V( J# E* s4 a$ f) e6 m4 X2 u1 d
我唔認為lor' C4 e  u4 `1 M% C

3 z0 S" M3 g, W: p9 y6 I6 Z7 V唔係話要整死佢地: y3 F6 O. ~% K4 F  R/ G

( S* e/ A; v$ v而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用7 l( i. Q6 D) [2 \" b6 O' j. S  s5 `
; r$ Q1 [6 c. x6 `3 g" E" }
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大& k4 y  g- b$ q
* l* D" d: J+ f& J
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的8 k* S3 [/ S1 ^! B. X
6 i0 I$ q' ]  c) L3 G$ z
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
" J9 N% e' j) R% e$ t1 ]/ B' A7 E  q
: C  p7 G# ^! 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
; ^  a) O" _% a1 |2 U2 q, 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"
/ M1 G8 V, B2 ^7 S' N  c8 |  S% v" D1 _: L1 l4 }8 H( z) ]1 S$ @
我們的大學生* V2 D2 L4 R& N' w7 [( W3 ^+ s3 e7 }
/ D4 U& ~' N' K6 [& I

+ \9 |; \0 a" C. }/ R1 f7 D" }9 ?" Y( l% B
, L* ~) j/ e9 w' ~5 K

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:8 I. \9 e8 a1 U3 U

# I" }2 x( g; ~+ m" P/ o( D8 t
; f7 g8 V1 E& z& E/ G  n6 f有見地 !!!
5 X4 j/ w* V) r/ P7 F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
5 w3 f& w& R1 A; D( y- L
6 ]0 q  Y$ t0 B# D: ?, t9 mI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
8 T; `2 v- [# Q% K: {& F7 cI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
  {" J* j- ?& i# j, P3 _I pretty sad that about the University official.
# e$ Y6 s. H: DIt'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
- K% l/ G& L$ z* x- v: h0 N8 f$ q
9 W9 o6 r( w. p$ x[ 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:* F2 E/ \6 ?2 Q  e
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 la6 @5 U2 q' K$ c$ F/ T6 x
+ f: m( X$ m8 A9 \
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" C. }: E8 }' b  Q% l* G% D8 J
1 |! v; m, x6 P3 m; w# U+ O8 r兩者有何分別?
/ L& B1 U3 n2 t# P中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?