奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:( e+ M7 s& C- B/ K
5 `  Q$ s7 j7 j! h$ d3 y) [5 L
agree,! ]0 ^# W* e) {! c$ @" n+ k( u& u
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,) H' [. \. \6 B. G* M/ P
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
% N" T8 E( B( W/ p) ]) ?0 ]1 `期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

: K. `) u& F+ Y. t+ W, ]9 E' I3 n! Jhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html0 r& L/ |1 ~1 M+ f3 O0 ~
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# l  C9 B1 d: Q! y$ t
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.! T& r7 g/ I* U: G0 M( H
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
; X3 |, j# `+ l$ S7 ]有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
5 o* H* Q, ?" V3 E
4 u5 C! k8 d2 Z5 R  d0 b7 o# j" F係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
6 O: V9 j- {. j
+ j* I$ G' Z9 o! I# ^% L  m( S8 k$ p為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

2 C  D* l$ ^0 k% w2 X$ |: G1 p+ m( J# x6 y4 Y( E
絕對支持啦( U3 n* ]8 j) j& I4 H
3 B8 z% k! i7 y! N/ Q
有錯就認,打就企定; ?- {! ^7 t. T, Q4 ~7 D2 i

' ]- g- J) [( N, B( x# \. w無錯當然要撐到底1 ~/ L! a* I7 l  Q

( a: c& g) W) ^* e% m; q) b7 p但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩. u' L5 B  Q' x1 W- Q( e

& _5 u* ?" V, F3 U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! y) Z! N( {! w1 X' z& ]
3 v+ N+ u% u' ^" _
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
/ D9 y! h& E! s# \- {9 r8 t; {
+ ^% k1 N1 \1 L3 ]& I我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
) Q% s: O0 _, B
* W- r( p6 S) T$ v唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?1 i3 @" ?6 Z' b7 b/ g

, [/ c* q. x- @6 _, L+ z我唔認為lor
3 p  X% `6 r1 _( g1 v9 ^- t' g- z7 q" p3 a( [4 N
唔係話要整死佢地8 [) v. v8 n$ i, X* {
# |7 C1 r* m) J# E6 {( k2 ?% r) U
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
0 p, \7 L3 x0 f. I/ J( {" h2 [, k! ^. N+ y5 N! K
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
& k" Z. {9 T6 i- [5 r/ f% r% V3 Y
7 {6 ?8 P. Q1 {* R+ d有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的7 w: e$ O# K, Y/ E% v# G

* J0 e) G, O2 j5 G8 I4 g9 j唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
! Z. j) B  E/ t" _) h# J5 E. k9 q4 M) q
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- g5 |  `  q! E2 M( V6 h& f, p
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"& V$ }. B- Q% a/ O5 b- n8 I
8 d* b3 Y7 d: q# a
我們的大學生2 T) i2 z, w' D# u+ Z3 W0 H

  K" Z8 H+ _$ H6 l3 k8 v7 h; I* x, n8 M& S. k; {/ x% G

+ r# w) ~/ A. I. y1 m% ]. A* M6 o5 v0 d" g/ ]9 F. g; T1 ~

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:1 Y$ |5 U6 H* D- }: V
6 b8 P- ?) c# R6 W" H
2 F* y4 y$ @- p" e
有見地 !!!4 Q* i/ C, |3 G9 z, W; v# n" 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
. G( ~8 O5 t3 ?- R- U) h( ^# a- J$ @) t- {# n
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
% ~& ^  ~8 L" P0 V% N0 u1 E! FI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
3 K/ S: H; g4 _0 `$ `; g' JI pretty sad that about the University official.
! W- _  f- f  Z( w8 BIt'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 la0 n5 C9 c7 [# q) l

! Q: _  }9 a  K0 ?% P2 l6 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 17:24:7 T+ K/ q0 j7 B- s1 O+ G8 p
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
( R+ o* t0 B  m9 }* k$ D- k; v7 e$ J# t6 T, `5 X" {8 J
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

1 u$ f+ ]: e1 V; i( k6 ]) R

- _" E3 o2 z; S+ V8 S- p3 D) V兩者有何分別?- ], G1 D- d8 b& i1 N, R& {
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?