奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
) J. P) D* N1 ~% i4 B0 k" Y
6 M9 F& }5 p2 P9 o5 c: Hagree,
  i0 @, T* w* V1 H, b我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,( m4 U' X0 u" K) M9 ?& f
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,) P0 _5 A. y, y6 Z
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

; Q% C; m; \' M' ^- }: G
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
% h" z1 l% a$ H* j& g" t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
4 o$ i. W2 E1 f# a' 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.6 o5 K2 ]: a) v
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:9 k7 E" W, }% ~4 G$ C7 \
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
6 X) Z- R* O, C8 P  E6 Q3 ]4 P2 O# _) E2 B: L5 _: [8 u
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
# v" [0 n# g3 e8 |
0 {% p( t; y2 @5 _- T& _為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

2 g1 L7 P; D, j! q- G$ M+ `: u( [: t
絕對支持啦
2 o/ H5 j3 \' b5 w# k3 l0 v% v& k: y
有錯就認,打就企定
! ?/ h6 ]0 E8 v+ W' d0 b! ^( ^, U' Z% J- Q% q& [
無錯當然要撐到底! o6 u3 e2 c' F9 C5 u1 H% }
0 t2 b! }# E' ?. V6 P
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩" t9 u, Z% `# L/ u7 q
9 C2 d/ q2 x, 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
. T# g4 Q, M% x% z0 ~  }1 k; y, m
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
- [. k- h( ~6 Z2 `2 J
' l  q1 N/ D& L& l我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
( r" E8 _9 D* i' }9 p& L# w5 V2 Y( d! w( u
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?% F, n) y3 Z) O7 T/ M: S& F2 a
, I4 u$ Z9 p0 e! {7 A
我唔認為lor
" S. ~5 H& Z# Z9 i( ~
5 u% g2 u- u+ `  ~2 M唔係話要整死佢地3 O* t3 l8 n$ m0 J, c  Y* Q
3 m- {* [  B+ n# P) r
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
7 \" r" H7 N& b3 I( c7 m' d
- S) C% N7 _! y/ s/ e我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
0 y: P/ U+ q/ |! ~; i1 u4 _. n  s: H+ V4 l4 T
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
3 H$ H/ m  ?- ~0 D% y
. a/ q- I  Q" p% N8 N唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由" r6 u1 V* G! e+ e9 J0 N/ a5 O
0 ~& g$ t$ l1 Z/ @7 R) |; S% d
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- {" `1 X- J1 t, n  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"
4 E$ x( p* I0 y+ `: v9 S; z
6 O2 E; v2 T5 I2 P& l* H8 }$ v我們的大學生6 H6 l9 W# L1 H# M- o

6 \0 ?5 c9 A- ]. }3 T- K
$ S- Y4 I2 y: n5 z& H
+ d' d1 b5 W% `# `4 C  c2 d+ ]
1 E# Q( y' A1 p0 m" q% s

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
2 e# p- E$ w* @( ]# \2 G
7 n: l0 E7 M2 B' m" f( O! |5 l) S1 V
有見地 !!!
% V& D9 Y- r9 N! w4 w. `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
& t$ t" x4 U/ v1 X( w% I* g: D
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
- ^$ n1 n  w8 \I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
6 U, \" ]: `1 D; H8 M/ a4 {I pretty sad that about the University official.
6 `4 V0 I# N0 {  c/ C* |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
, `& {" i! M2 t# ~
" m& p" \3 c' Q[ 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 t4 e4 l2 m/ d/ \$ Q4 X8 }
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; I1 g* f$ q- Z
: Z, o; _( X2 d
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

) I; m- j/ W# E8 v0 ~$ c
( k$ q# Z( F3 q- L2 M, S6 ~3 R) N* E$ c兩者有何分別?. \3 c7 ?( G7 B) X) c9 {
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?