奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:5 T: ^' X2 X2 h9 O3 ~" s
+ D2 A+ H& w: c
agree,1 J! r1 d1 J6 X. u/ J& T9 O; v
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,' H7 @  K, t4 z0 n% y* h0 p4 Y
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,/ ^( M! v5 U5 l4 Y& N! m4 r
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

0 X3 B4 X6 }6 n# zhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
- l" E, ?" R; {' p* [  p& A0 ^  U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
( c7 o( ~$ }  ?$ Q( w1 n) v7 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.
+ s' i# S* r; k& S+ ^Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:6 y: p, e6 l5 z9 a8 u" f% J; G
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ! g* ^5 p  y9 k
' N) |9 @- _* I3 a3 @
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
* `7 v# ~8 \! ^! s# o( q7 k
3 y+ ?0 T) p: g2 O: P! m6 {為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

7 j6 u+ z4 }( N# F' a# c' n
5 P. \% \3 \% G# G
絕對支持啦
" Y+ d2 N. k( Z' p( x
. x* R& u4 E" a! E$ m- {5 m! S有錯就認,打就企定
+ Z+ F# f  Q! O* R: S, B7 L& H# W, X  M% ?  U7 K' N4 \
無錯當然要撐到底
( v' L; G1 k- f: f( n: \( L: u' O) S8 E$ B
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩+ Q1 n% O& G  g# H4 q  V

" m; O& d) q9 ~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$ q/ S; O1 _; f# \- ~. o
; G% }5 I- U; a! [
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
# k8 ]) B& Z: N3 _  M3 v6 |( H/ M2 o' f* K" P4 F! f
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
' u6 b. K, |6 B1 s6 w; ]" ~- F  e" b8 j- C
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
! U4 m6 Q' ^9 `. i( [& O8 L, W/ X
' C, f9 C0 X/ B& R3 A" g  V我唔認為lor
* q* x+ ^  D3 m9 k: G$ X9 p
9 r4 x# u* }, o+ l% |& y唔係話要整死佢地
9 _# Z6 ?, ^$ M+ K" D/ a  }! D2 z8 a* n
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
9 W. ^- g4 ~1 G% I4 P
! v1 @) h0 k4 o) \1 ?" q9 r9 z我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
$ Q7 E, E* u7 ~: n5 R# E+ M3 I
9 O3 Y0 ~$ F( ]0 ]有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的; y# ]3 I" v& F8 Q
/ H5 ?+ ?3 \" `" i
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
/ e! I- {, c$ r+ @( |/ u7 [% b
0 r2 t0 h& g1 l( 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( _* p9 G+ \; R( P" o& G: k
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"* K6 m# w& u  ]

4 i) o( [9 x3 O- y% p6 z$ e  b我們的大學生, d2 Q% ]0 C$ d% G+ @  [1 \6 _

; t9 e* R7 ~' H! o- X4 D5 |' m3 r, x2 W, M( d
/ B! T$ K+ Z/ |$ o  d
. }- l" x- ^) s

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:7 M0 C3 v5 w3 b( L, J
4 R8 o0 L: f% B: A5 N3 \6 j- }. u

1 L( x- n% A6 z, z. M  M有見地 !!!
2 Q2 o7 t; d- H* p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& R! K0 ]/ |, f. [5 O

" l$ B8 B: {: Q+ c/ P7 d" iI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. * B" D6 j) T4 b5 |9 s
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
) I5 k% k# N. a4 GI pretty sad that about the University official.
6 ~. V) Q- V4 b4 |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
0 L: Z( h" `! h9 ]9 |% x. A5 t. ]! w1 z) t! Z, l: M
[ 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 _0 \8 F" X& u4 I2 @: ], ?
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
' B5 P% _$ W* v4 e
( P4 L, e) x( t# r[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

& i4 W8 H6 D! w+ S* B4 k
3 M9 F: l* F) b  `6 @* Z/ b* `兩者有何分別?7 S& u, l$ K$ G5 i9 y. g$ w
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?