奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:1 m6 V( `6 P9 G, {  p+ h/ r
7 @% g% `6 V1 o$ s& q. f  Z
agree,3 u9 d# ~6 L' D
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
  m/ ?6 e$ |8 m9 O. c" r4 g* ?但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
8 e; ^. ], s  O) C, v期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

$ {& q/ |  P. l; f+ vhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
; }5 ]7 y9 L0 n( c2 l3 h9 k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* k0 ^( U' a0 F; i/ l" @1 A% j
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." s; @* H. x" r( a
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:& c1 l' b9 C$ Y* N
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
6 t) a# y/ C5 r! W: w$ U3 b  P- ^
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???$ \$ }0 o3 W1 s7 J" N! z

" W! L0 f' a5 @) P為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

4 E5 n8 m, ?. Y/ L6 L3 l

& L# Z' Q; A' G# f! D6 L" ]9 m絕對支持啦  ~# ^0 W$ X1 `8 c9 Y* D# [
& @& V+ |; H; }2 m) U- i( T8 G
有錯就認,打就企定0 g4 ~1 ^: G% t2 J  o: w1 ^
8 `+ H7 R5 W3 A; s" k' c7 T
無錯當然要撐到底: h. h# D' g% o9 |
4 C+ Y: m$ A# l7 W. U- w
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
/ e4 b& w7 ]- H
* Y! r; L3 W) w, M! A& 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8 R0 X, t/ _  O' D: S

$ A& @. g( j5 T. p一份公眾讀物係好有影響力) e$ w) ?3 N  X0 i2 u$ Y8 |

6 |8 \8 ?7 N/ [我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
# q6 Q& j6 @* v9 e$ E* C3 `9 i, H/ y7 E0 e  M" ^
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
8 W4 e' a. }, F$ _  o' X2 E. E# A2 ]
我唔認為lor
( d3 ]+ p$ j- q" u
: \3 q# ^& V0 D* W: J唔係話要整死佢地# d7 Q% N9 E6 P# a. c' j% _

( G( c# x4 E: n: i3 @# A9 _而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用5 a1 ?5 b, g7 U3 P6 V3 V3 F

' C% v" E( u! x6 d; V8 d$ F我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
& @0 D5 q5 w/ q; r1 A* K0 ?6 I( J* G. U
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的( ^# T  f, x7 G& Y0 w  J$ Y7 d
4 f( F! N! Y8 F4 l
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
1 G( n( s* z& E3 X
/ C2 Q! b. w2 h  i4 a" @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
+ N7 G$ I+ r1 `"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 W# R3 E' }; B/ _: S* \8 t1 v( o7 J( q$ O% _
我們的大學生' s2 X/ w" J) n  ^( ?: `

+ z9 X3 K4 v) E/ C1 v  e: ?8 m+ A$ z3 ^- N/ R  v

, }& H$ `1 j$ k4 \, @$ i& z) o* @7 \9 X0 l; o7 y! ?% C3 `

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
  g/ [9 i9 g8 q2 {7 X
" t' F9 t7 ^. M- b: C5 U* c1 f  y& H, o- K" v" F  F' P
有見地 !!!( T) p1 I- `; Z- \8 m' d
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
  N0 S) X& m1 W2 T  Y0 l: [8 i) J8 J2 |8 e* x
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
5 t1 G1 N& @- D2 v2 A* mI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
; ], ~8 n  Y5 GI pretty sad that about the University official." u( U- v( y; ]: {
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
# r2 [: {  L2 u4 r8 T" ?7 j9 T8 s5 {/ O/ ^
[ 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:
, J+ M& _- U# Z% J. i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+ ?/ ?+ i3 c, v1 l3 I

9 A! n! ^4 y% Q; b" r8 L[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

7 e( r4 p. g2 x0 c# p! I
* Y, j# f: K" u
兩者有何分別?
, V- A, _. l: Z5 n9 ^) [中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?