奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
/ ~: Q/ x8 J1 q8 c. d" A4 a/ c7 `  {8 I" [9 @' r/ y
agree,
* Y; b# ^3 t5 M* b. V. D& S我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,; u, g8 r% o( Q- v
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
/ \% h1 a+ I6 u, ~期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

. Y$ b9 G2 [- `3 mhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html% z5 e5 g5 v  ?  c, k* F
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 G# j; @; j$ S! j
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.1 I  [7 K; a" j6 V" k
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
$ a2 t8 Q! U, n8 B4 d有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 0 d. i' W! L+ X6 B' E- Z
! f8 a% Z- A& M$ D. y1 H* L
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
5 g) V8 Y. ^+ Z& Q: z4 v# z4 _) |% T4 a! L% y) C- I' @3 \
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 |5 x, G: d* ?6 }  @( w/ |
' K, @1 O: _" A1 j3 }8 m  q3 @
絕對支持啦
3 _1 J) Q9 r' R  _8 [& R" b7 d: h: j6 E. l0 X- R( O- w& a
有錯就認,打就企定
+ q: [, g( r# b9 N/ ~5 k; A7 v7 e
, \$ ^8 F8 I& o無錯當然要撐到底% b1 G$ [. m) P, ?0 J

0 `. Y4 Q0 G/ z+ K+ J( T- n但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
8 L3 `& o0 o1 y3 E" {' O( `
% L$ A. ^2 s' ^& a4 ~# t1 ^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
; C* t- L6 L- `7 p! b% m: c; X
( g) D- H! G0 f" J* O* {: c; b1 E一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
9 G; ^( W' h3 o" a7 A8 _7 t4 I* i) a' X4 j0 l2 x) T
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生, P8 v8 ]: m4 {) _5 U: i
) ?: I" O' I2 E: J. b
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?8 d: r5 o1 F* ^0 @. ~
- u0 @$ G. `$ _" @: g0 W
我唔認為lor" `. I) G& g& A/ K8 j  P- \
  j7 Z& N% Z+ s/ @
唔係話要整死佢地
. s# Q% p3 O- }6 Z2 A! p. M( ^( K( P# E5 Z5 Y2 \* d) ]
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用: ~0 K3 n1 n+ l( o; w* A
7 |3 g4 {0 J: b. `
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
) A7 m! j/ x# S1 M5 o$ ~, t6 h$ r& X% d) Q$ K
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
; o' ?! t$ t. u; \, h. K! }' j- i# g
/ Z, B" i4 A) R& {7 ?/ O唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由/ ~0 M# W$ G& j3 Z1 K  d( ^9 q, a
+ D. x5 |1 A3 N- Y7 u
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
% J1 i! b4 `) X+ i"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
4 Z$ k: s' O# `9 s$ N1 s6 y0 G
. E0 ~2 H/ w) s我們的大學生9 Q. x6 t: P  a

5 e; Z# C+ o8 b% g* w- v; B: J: X9 f6 k3 l7 }+ S9 T

, U  x; m! Y# R9 t* z  k! {" S6 s2 B) ~7 u% E0 O. a/ M

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:1 ]6 U. ?' u6 ^, I, d- C$ q

' \. E+ a7 I" _! S0 ~- n4 e/ W8 I  C. T1 w
有見地 !!!$ E' Z# E$ O/ \+ b' i
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.html9 g9 n+ {4 k/ e1 s

, C1 C: C& B0 @4 R& x! WI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. - O0 X  y* C5 V
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
% g% t; j2 R1 y! uI pretty sad that about the University official.* P% H, V- F2 b) A4 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, b$ {" g0 l3 C) [! S
  R  [( G6 u' _* ^; e7 Q: D
[ 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:
1 A6 b* p8 M& e6 I2 c6 b% i" r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 la0 Z9 o% G' P9 _8 @
) y7 u( q" v5 V) W0 q. Q
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

/ T: b. s, R( m' L. L: ]

$ Z1 S5 f& M& }  v7 f6 ?, W% U/ s兩者有何分別?7 D! M: U* X% i# k: F7 D
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?