奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
+ k1 `5 B% z4 p; \+ I* ?- T$ I
/ a, s) U, W  ~  Q: m) n- a# jagree,, a  v+ U# [# ]1 X! G
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
0 ~, k# N+ E- A! C: K但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,' r% M7 [' _4 z6 L" A2 T
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

" Y" ?/ T/ @* o. n, S2 }# k
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html' N& ~9 I% P6 W4 n& 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0 m! H2 ~; `# D3 G2 Z
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.( M, w6 J6 ?2 Y, s3 k5 L
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
/ r/ ?) G8 ], o0 I' y* |+ o有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！   z, t9 G( E- `8 N  u  H
/ ?1 r5 P9 E' U3 f& h& z
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???- ]0 t- Q, Q: h9 @) |: t

1 ?4 R7 k. `) r* S) a, m為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

2 n+ |! s+ _6 L; C% v  ~! Y( U& z
絕對支持啦  A+ q3 e) k+ v2 {1 b$ @  G
3 R2 _# c$ [8 [
有錯就認,打就企定
1 O* q4 i! W( _  J$ E
' ?' K4 q# p7 o7 @6 Y8 B無錯當然要撐到底; b% E4 S  k4 S( K
* j9 R  z0 k! B) }4 S) Q
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩, N( X& m' J9 I0 v6 `" L4 s; f, k

& h' g  l6 K9 z2 t, m3 v' H- C3 B/ |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* L9 y/ \. b( T6 {+ D1 R4 z
9 D; G, \% H4 |9 C7 V' o6 ]2 D1 a: X7 U
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力2 F$ X% G% u( B9 s

/ d" o; \3 R! P8 w我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
0 E( N/ U" Z' [* s' _( C9 [3 v5 b8 U0 {: C# R6 I
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
6 j7 o) Z6 K/ X3 O9 Y+ o2 {: o3 i* h& ]; ~
我唔認為lor# K% F* k! w+ i* Z0 ^% v1 p3 o

& e' R& K5 O3 I+ E/ l6 s5 }唔係話要整死佢地0 g/ u5 C' l+ C; [7 M
; w( X3 ]* f, l. P+ K  m
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用1 A8 m/ v% M# H' E6 i
5 d8 N! s$ u9 }$ K& v
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
4 c9 J9 q. i! E, d& Q- l" R' J/ b) _" p
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
0 l# w3 U: k- |) U+ L
) _$ y: g5 L5 T! k0 {- \+ A唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由% t4 ?, o; {5 C# S! O1 I" ^

; x$ t; @6 o& U' I5 b0 [6 \6 ?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
/ m8 [# p( G# D; [, Y"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"  P0 a  b& [7 O: X4 G# {

* U/ j2 M% ]. A. u$ p我們的大學生
* c2 ?" Z% I3 F) d* b
( V3 ^0 z+ C1 M4 i* p7 e+ H' \0 q. N9 F/ P; S
4 d4 T) E* f. c! L* ~$ Q) `

9 x: f, ]5 W& i: O  c: p

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:/ Q% Y: b3 H9 B' b8 o8 |0 y% B

) ?7 @3 ~# n9 |" R+ D& d/ i
& b4 F1 N8 Q: _% G. Y3 s& O有見地 !!!3 v# H  W+ c; u1 E+ Y
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/ Z( r/ G: c$ H  S* A9 [

- a* v% v: f" O. N3 Q# wI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
6 k; W0 J( t/ P# `) Q: JI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
* w, S/ E+ j" ^& E9 O4 F5 N& s$ LI pretty sad that about the University official.
# g) t3 {% e( ~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
, J, ^$ `% Q8 t6 Y
5 C( F. w! i' `, N% Y' n& 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:
% O$ q" `8 N7 ^# v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- [% }* B0 B# T& C$ k& I0 K

# ?. {/ z5 F3 n- S& v' S[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

' z$ y& M: W  d2 b2 H3 |! W& E7 b$ V7 d
兩者有何分別?, t4 b1 i+ z$ g, r2 n
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?