奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:& o" {4 N# A8 T; z
) L! x8 D7 L  T+ d1 C, w
agree,8 a* u/ V9 f; e1 @; U& A( Y
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主," I  t# J3 Z$ R, t* h3 ~
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,1 X+ n4 {( Z1 a7 v+ T: w( r
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

1 b2 a: I0 U8 Q4 c( t
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
+ C# V, W9 X8 D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! p2 ]# K6 G" N; a4 i% a
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.
5 r# L' G: M* f! xJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
) ~$ f: ^1 D+ V6 S有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
* o# P/ W- U  X5 r/ o4 T8 ^5 J* \3 z% z) f% k/ W
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
9 w  `8 R' r0 x# e* `) H' n9 m8 ?. v. G7 ^
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 A8 f: h) r8 \4 C! k% W

- q; N$ z5 e# t; C  K8 N& T9 z絕對支持啦7 ]5 X  C% B% ?4 G  q! V4 ?* x

1 h, Z/ B4 r: [. M有錯就認,打就企定3 i+ A7 a: V' @0 e. Y4 ^
  U+ j; e! U  w0 S9 h2 r
無錯當然要撐到底: A! B" N$ X  p+ B4 F! ~3 H+ |% A) k

, z9 h2 f$ d; W& o但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩. i: p4 }1 J6 c
0 N- \" T2 W( q. C
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
) q9 ?7 j8 W! `- z- g
" M- o+ _, ~6 w+ G7 x9 t一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
5 {/ U5 p5 S' `# g. J5 q1 l5 I! g: W: l- G! `# B0 t0 @
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
# ?- }" m7 J- f
2 A1 t0 P/ ~8 D+ m+ g唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?! t/ n# c# S7 I* h  |: k: j9 {) @
! l$ s+ Y0 ~; c
我唔認為lor
2 D, T4 A9 {/ ?( l4 N
1 s# G  w( Z: A* k  N. x唔係話要整死佢地
+ A: Z0 f9 V# u& b9 Q5 I' A
! Z) D2 q1 k9 t" }; s8 t而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用8 `# u% j. n, j4 e

: O0 G, _. d/ J! Z* a我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
$ U! }! W7 H- {6 s! f; c/ g; D! F
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
$ s& |, ^/ c% ~$ I* U8 q0 p2 w5 K% G
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
/ N; g* Q+ j; i: L8 R, l, y/ K% l- ]% h2 l. G4 J
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6 X) y/ g, b. x
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
8 \& ]5 a2 Z. `
2 g7 a4 I" d. _. @8 ^7 d我們的大學生: ]5 E- d* K1 W, x( F) o
* H, a( K) I* a2 T8 S

; M8 t5 c) i7 G6 m: a* I+ i1 D/ f* D3 p( |0 k+ z
' E, r4 E4 V) `0 J4 z' O9 y

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
# A! G( Y3 Q5 w" z7 g  c
- X7 W& k" [; ?; z9 H) w% @9 J+ a% K- ?+ A6 T
有見地 !!!; o; Y% }8 d2 e1 h, G  g- _
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
! q9 E' f6 j% d7 b
: P+ e0 g( K- `( P# S( h, K) n6 \I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. , `/ m' k3 g$ C8 k+ q! V4 V! q
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. % y% x( g! R0 t; k2 B+ L9 k
I pretty sad that about the University official.
- s- k3 i: H2 b# M. 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 la, ~1 L: G- }3 }) k# C

8 j% W+ Z: X" z. e- g' E" r; Y[ 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:
+ |6 O  O1 J. e( C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
: ^: H, v) o* N6 Y4 @! z8 z* v: D' ]- ^0 @! m, q
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

% F/ }6 f' u2 ~4 v+ F4 j

9 c$ c& J  d! }8 b兩者有何分別?
; y9 {0 b, l4 j  @3 @4 F中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?