奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:# K2 h; \) V5 l, _3 c1 q

" C  k: Y. G9 L$ F; t4 i$ Dagree,2 E* z* ?6 S3 c2 \5 w
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,5 P  z$ B2 d8 f, N& V) {; t
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,. Y( U  L8 K  [0 u
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

* x' K) `9 u) z$ {
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
! }2 U7 p; Y6 I  X4 [8 _( }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
% w! U- I+ {. h9 B4 n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% n4 W9 [1 i% D6 {/ v9 d
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
' U# d) I; S$ B- v" p% M/ I3 V有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！   n- p+ _- q8 r+ y! ~

' M" g* `# H* e/ ~, r' y) F5 S/ ]係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
5 h: A2 B7 {: G( v
5 O1 R& A0 v& v: Z6 ]& b為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

' k5 t% C9 v' g0 c
( B! G0 b# K$ G7 L5 p2 r絕對支持啦0 m& p9 l1 ?0 Y3 v' X. U1 P

/ B; A7 l5 J+ B- {/ Z$ }3 K& \) T' P1 _有錯就認,打就企定
3 a2 |$ h0 O0 J* v' _; ^  v
/ `% |" p& t( X7 t4 I$ w無錯當然要撐到底
/ R9 h( \; f/ H" |; F, f9 i( H  F# s/ V, u. D3 }2 G) {
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
8 G( o9 o! r9 u5 P/ |
2 {  ]$ x2 F" t+ N- R. k" }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
  V$ |1 \# Z1 }/ ^. \! `) V+ n% M) q* u+ X
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力3 T) w8 x  q- ~3 X
9 K: j' r; ~7 x4 z- C4 O$ r- f6 S
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
, \1 X: N: U/ t% l% K; l# Y7 P% F& t9 `0 E) ]
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?6 w2 w+ z% L6 [& Z/ O+ f! v  {; k! i

5 d  g3 K) h# W7 p; N我唔認為lor. C8 p$ @* T! s6 e% |

$ v$ T4 B/ ~( ], b6 u" N: z: e唔係話要整死佢地
& ~0 ~0 r2 ?1 C9 d* v' |
& I! l; i, N. N. i* g而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用* g& F6 B4 L* a- h9 X
& F& [" {0 I; P9 _
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
0 J* q: ]# L# p2 i; R+ L$ O# ]+ }. ?1 Q# ?1 _' P, q6 \# M
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
# _1 P1 d# `2 Z, l0 I2 N
+ q1 r  i5 A9 ^& y  D) I2 r% R. ]唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由' Y% }- K* p9 [+ L' _, ^
* C: D4 j$ c; b$ O
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
& D2 F* C# a6 W  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", D7 H( d$ X$ x
, d. D- l+ O) e* \
我們的大學生
) m* T: L. Y  V+ y5 n% q2 z7 N! H" e  r) j3 s7 k

( o, A+ w% m2 m) ]2 x7 }6 @4 W( r' U- g& G

- S) v4 u1 _" \( M" u

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:! ?  I$ b( d& L1 a" n8 B% E9 F

2 I! j& f- V8 Y/ o8 @% }
: ~% r2 l: H+ j( N5 X- ^! K  J0 C# \有見地 !!!
$ \; j- c- m% M- r0 }7 P- e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
: h. }2 u. t" n: {& w3 l$ J# A
- @" e( F) r* R, U) ^2 X% ^8 aI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
& K3 G3 G8 D% y7 I; t* ]7 z0 jI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
5 [: Y1 D+ W5 `I pretty sad that about the University official.' i) \) i" s1 m5 X
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
+ t6 f9 Q& N; \1 l! d" E8 \; `0 B: ?7 J5 P  r$ I1 K5 K
[ 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:
+ L" r. I. P# q2 M& z: o0 N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; G, u- c% {/ h5 S6 ?" C

% m: M8 i1 ]0 b1 n# ][ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

- w, {% R5 F: Y0 ~  `8 `' }
% e8 T1 ^( h$ l1 ?5 ^' ~兩者有何分別?
( W# |, m  O$ g中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?