奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
$ E/ X. u- I) p: Y) `
. R5 B3 J/ V" [agree,
7 ]$ ^/ m+ t1 x+ A# P: v我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
) p) c* J2 h2 i; ?* h但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,- u" [( u# R( w" q# Q# [" Z
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

4 B$ C. M* O$ ]- V* Whttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html: ]* Y# d' B+ c6 F3 B
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; |* k4 J- y- B
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 h# J6 ]' w0 ]) j" ^; Q! x- S4 TJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:- f! `5 s5 I* V3 k) }
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
2 e- y% c% Y& v+ F
$ v9 u8 U" l. _. l1 ]; K$ x  P係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
3 m# Z( N: \4 m) f% C6 `" m  d$ k/ [# s0 ]9 Z, {; A# u
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

, Q8 t. P! f, l4 f+ T1 [
/ L& X' E: c9 X" u! Z: U
絕對支持啦
) Y6 L/ O+ P0 z5 ]% W  @% `9 |; \1 [; b: z. l
有錯就認,打就企定
( ]4 k5 S# U* r. L
$ y; N- N5 P# b無錯當然要撐到底
* W) Y6 t$ [, ?$ \5 f
+ V; ^: m' C$ [& A但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
$ @9 u) M5 }* }8 h* {7 e3 Q
  d! d! H% J$ b* a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
9 o- Z! @2 p! Z0 Q6 X) i2 ?: f2 d9 r9 c0 D: j: }9 x
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力- p% a" a8 Y+ n0 ^; x- O
6 Z/ U1 K* K+ o- b2 @9 G
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生+ W, D! a5 [0 j; I
* [0 Q6 b/ u3 z' B6 p) v" O! X2 G
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?- z5 A. h0 ~$ Y1 j1 W& p5 J

2 q4 M, K2 ^4 M% ]/ j& g我唔認為lor
& ~6 b$ t% d; @; x5 [7 P; B$ O0 J  h3 z1 h+ [
唔係話要整死佢地
0 H  _" I6 T& o! B' x% g$ M- M3 O
1 M' X; t% f( ?6 M而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
7 M% I0 F5 G) C5 k+ T8 M3 l* o! T& w6 D: y* _
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
3 b5 J$ P1 J4 Q; A% [  m' U
9 |$ _  T: z! `' G4 b' F) f; v有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的0 U$ |- s: x" U/ ]
: P; l: y# L+ m8 A8 Z
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
* k( M+ t( y1 G: d/ P( z# O3 V) i% w6 k, V4 q. g2 S
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
0 C6 ^4 L5 B: _& }/ w0 Z" M# q"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
7 Q+ ~+ Q. _9 r3 |$ Y3 F5 {$ c# @  J6 \+ D8 B, w. y; S  z$ S6 E
我們的大學生6 u2 ?  y5 M4 F* O8 m8 Z; F" u  A

8 B7 P& |2 T3 _" b: N5 ^( ~4 P  u
. y/ |3 C1 x& N
3 B, P: Z. {3 n# D9 ]
2 Z7 \; }- }% L8 g0 x1 I1 R7 j: C! q8 A

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
1 w. D7 v! F3 [& C+ {8 o+ P, U- E( }) ~& M

( H0 B+ H1 ?. G% N4 L( q" c* x2 Z0 ~/ }有見地 !!!
7 @  J; S9 A3 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
; H# [0 a0 o0 R% c; A# f$ a% {, e- ]' Y! u# B
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
9 [& q( ?' J  @' BI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ; u6 j0 \5 q0 L
I pretty sad that about the University official.& r) Z: h! o* W" I7 U
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
( g; w# m9 c- l: d' Y
8 Q; y1 h+ P, [& _[ 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:
( O% E1 z# v! [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 la3 Y  Z6 A1 J* P8 P6 r
9 ^% E7 k9 j* ]7 k
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

- G7 M; B/ k0 X* o+ Z' b. E
2 b; K+ h- s2 s1 N兩者有何分別?
0 k  @1 s2 t' r$ i6 H  }中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?