奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:2 k1 @) l- G/ ^2 W
! o& \$ ^; S& j5 D! A- n' m
agree,  c" H9 D, O$ q" e3 x
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,. W! I# y! b9 j4 v9 j
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,' A9 y: U* J5 r8 M! F" U+ g
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

3 B8 Z, {) j% g) }+ ^4 G7 Y3 `
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
. h% {* b8 ^; P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1 S" |; p+ m, [* B# y
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.. {: ?7 q7 \+ i6 m9 v" q6 r: [
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
  I2 n& D, y! Z2 N( |  J有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ) t% I) H) w2 T6 f9 }5 F5 m
4 g- ]1 K" c2 O- E
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
/ c( X+ |/ \: |( o7 U9 T
: l1 K! O, |) R( M為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

/ |/ d9 l0 w) T
0 r' e7 O. }3 \# c# ]
絕對支持啦
  L' V2 f* y0 V+ K; y5 d3 v! o: C- M9 O& W4 b; |) Q
有錯就認,打就企定  W. p" ^; F( \0 f8 M7 u! E

+ i' V" W9 g- f1 O+ a3 ]無錯當然要撐到底
( @* a7 f4 h. X2 {9 B8 \
+ j$ u" k& {' [  F4 M0 X) Q  a但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩6 ^0 p2 d8 P  J2 R. q; C" Q
* k  P/ I% c: T5 E
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
' @7 ~5 F& m' M, J! c7 R# @
1 g9 X- [7 e- f0 Q5 ~1 c6 Q一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
, M0 h# ^- \' {8 v3 g  z; L2 I/ m' N
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
# M  Z' @" b# e' s8 D7 |
) ]. E/ E" j# }% c( O6 R: y, M唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
& U$ o9 E: b9 f6 L7 N8 }8 }
6 ?* _& ^& x) C, a8 H1 j9 G我唔認為lor
: R) ?+ q3 C( b5 _4 ^; M% O, y+ z! P  Y
/ g- x, o7 F! k唔係話要整死佢地; R2 A3 ?! v# V; w7 l" R# T$ {
8 J! C8 \6 d5 @) }" }
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用* _* f: v: l7 m( C( s' j

; P5 s7 X0 K+ G) D; _4 h3 V我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
' v) ]6 g) ^, D5 u* M' D% \7 o4 I
- t& R) ?: b6 @/ M- y! F有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
! R! i/ u, T, v6 A% B3 S6 f4 g: Y
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
+ N6 M" q* F, ^* T* M4 n8 N
5 l( J6 B/ U# l  p- t5 r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# i' W! Q) C' n) U  d- {"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 P0 Y& ^* y9 S" t& f! I" W

7 n* _( k3 `5 s+ k9 e我們的大學生4 o7 C6 F# o# W6 k3 W7 u

; e  n. n" l$ g( @& Q9 N4 z
4 u6 o% d  C5 }5 T
0 \3 a: z2 O: ]  h9 M# J8 I! Z9 o5 w4 y

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
4 G( C- }9 q* `2 l" K; J8 ~  B% Q+ r$ O; n( Q0 W! h- t) w
& G, \# v# b( S9 a0 x
有見地 !!!
/ H; Z3 u/ f. t' k9 r+ \1 L- b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
& u$ Y/ t0 g: R% A% s2 ?4 C
- r. T: u. k1 a9 w& `6 cI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
8 f, q( i  p9 \; d9 ^+ k0 t! tI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 3 B3 r8 J( T2 h6 f9 o! \
I pretty sad that about the University official., }% l- @1 z; R; t. W
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
4 J: g2 O9 A6 ?0 I- B$ f1 ^* u5 u1 d6 r
[ 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:
0 E, d+ l( ]0 j; x: r/ Z+ Q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; @8 V! L; E  R- ~! X" X* R3 {
7 X& k2 a2 h* `" e8 Q2 ^
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

( j4 a6 Y: m! c3 I
: j3 O, h0 o+ @' Y0 J7 V兩者有何分別?! G) O- Y% n! U& g
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?