奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:) A/ I7 W( P: z
% C/ l* a! @) ~5 [1 w
agree,  |* L  N# E1 r  I7 R& k, f
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
. T7 m+ p1 K1 ^- q  p7 o" F但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
$ I2 c' i, K# C' O# U期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

4 w$ A: x  M# z; [: ^+ zhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html6 }8 d& o5 i$ r1 l( x
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
9 Z- t2 Z& ^  _# 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.2 |( H# P0 D) o# P
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:9 E6 E% [% q- z# k" X  M: H3 _( T
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
. M" K$ h  e- A% }8 c, r2 }# M3 X. b: o* L3 [  f
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
1 P  w8 j5 e+ Z; N7 w
' ^: q$ l2 b7 _% c為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

  n) c  q1 d8 q9 m4 i7 [3 \. Y0 X( G
絕對支持啦5 p5 s/ d, I* z7 W. @9 m

0 `# O4 q* m9 Z' S1 F) f% |" r有錯就認,打就企定
9 o+ D+ [. M1 U
0 a' N  T+ G1 s/ c! \  {無錯當然要撐到底
+ t8 T% g, ~: s+ J$ \7 W* |5 J5 \8 U$ Z5 A4 g3 @/ V0 L8 V  Z
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩/ h* Z& C: j7 I$ q0 v% j
$ z6 s1 [( ?- b
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 H0 S; T1 ]( F0 y: }
5 S3 V1 ]' ^8 }* h/ W/ E一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& e1 G& I6 i% q- L6 T+ Y% n
  N8 [3 G% b- h+ `
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
, d. r- n5 O- X& _! D/ z- \* u
' L9 q# u; y5 F! Y. n9 Q  s唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?' L8 `& y; T/ B5 r  O
) m; t% A  k% h+ L1 n1 e
我唔認為lor
: c; X/ ]9 a7 ^7 }# D/ R1 ?3 Z% b  c0 ^2 j# v
唔係話要整死佢地
. d+ J) I6 S2 @. }
& q- k& }$ P2 W; P5 G) i. T7 m而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
* |$ p' Q1 o6 L4 b; Y
& P  u5 e3 w+ \4 H3 E/ e我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
+ |1 C* h3 m  J& L" i
4 G( D3 `  q2 Y! U2 Z: s3 E有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的2 }( N* n6 G! n. w! x

4 f+ V, S. \: @" Y* ~# B0 o- p唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由8 ~! u$ v$ ^. d8 D2 i; |1 e

! ]9 N8 h, L+ b7 ^& M' B, g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
" M! r8 H1 ^+ B5 n/ \. p4 W+ V"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"( f* M9 E3 k5 F- f% _" B
* F8 c' X! U' L2 p! y
我們的大學生3 |0 T/ K0 e& r
4 d/ ]: g( o4 E4 I( ?
( x( w8 T  K8 G
& |# P6 A8 \) V# x" o* p# n
& B: S2 T' e( |

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
( H8 e" _4 Y, I+ S/ p+ w$ p' p4 B- |! h6 Y$ p7 x) m/ {

* `# l7 S, M) W" Y( m有見地 !!!
9 b% R+ L5 @+ Y+ T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% z& J2 f% h! @, f" F
9 D; ^+ l) V& I5 A
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
2 |: N, g& @  f* i1 B! GI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. , u/ W2 M+ }+ ?9 o8 ~+ f3 I% O
I pretty sad that about the University official.
$ z4 }9 ~( k- v$ T7 G2 s' g$ {3 d! FIt'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  y6 ]2 x4 `* B/ T9 O

% X- [5 Z/ x1 f1 e[ 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:
8 [# w2 t7 `! K4 Y5 h3 |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 h5 J( N  ?* N
  Y9 Y! I- U& T' G+ t* C[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

( }2 S  x1 B+ b: e

, ~; j% |0 u$ f: |5 ^& s  K  ?' c+ {兩者有何分別?! n, J  q( l# F8 k- g
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?