奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
7 q: m2 X! X* q( G6 M
2 m# U' Z" x7 \4 ?& K9 J/ oagree,
7 m6 J* F# N+ r' x& R我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
4 F& L; b  z" S. e' B- ~) t0 m但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,2 v$ W$ n/ }* g
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 a( ~3 V5 n8 ?/ |
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html! o, M. H; Q- s( z
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5 [! x, s' y& j4 k0 P2 W6 X: `
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.
" T5 C0 M: _5 F& HJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:1 ?3 @5 x$ `8 c4 _' i7 x  ~- _9 Y6 w
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 7 H# T% F( K4 I9 n
! `# C( D6 D2 b/ k* E
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
/ y4 O; q" \/ P3 \  s/ p2 n
" F% ^$ U: E# Y( P為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

' j# G8 O5 n' t6 S+ N3 i; ?" _/ R  C- G
絕對支持啦
4 L& U: k1 b* T* p/ V4 z5 T8 f7 i- A0 a
有錯就認,打就企定8 z) x4 @3 a5 u8 m8 N5 b& t( [' f

+ \. [& A, B9 G0 d無錯當然要撐到底" i+ ^4 Q5 P; Y
9 p  G. Z' D+ g! s
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
& s) t. j- A; f+ F5 B. A  n4 k2 S0 A; z( M* v
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
: L" r9 E  m& V' Z) ?" `6 U2 E1 n# U& w" r
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& S# m3 |# `/ n" ], Q! B
+ p7 n  X3 u  W
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生# ?  R1 ^% \+ ~# U
5 R6 w& D, ~) J% k- I
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
3 p& s- H; X2 W- c  J& u
2 ^3 o& V1 I% T4 B. E8 w0 Z我唔認為lor
4 q/ {$ |4 M% s! h/ z  y3 A7 X! `+ Z( U% u
唔係話要整死佢地
4 E/ j0 u4 d* [4 ]
' N5 z; j  O7 _3 Q0 n而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
9 z% t* W! h: w7 X- v) [; h3 e7 G* x/ Q: K
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
5 W7 y0 N- @% U$ }; V* I5 q9 h3 p
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
5 M+ k' w; N% \; j! c$ C& P& Z
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
: B+ }  n3 b) |8 S3 p2 A4 j( e4 o  |/ s1 P, 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, R2 ?3 F; t$ x6 h8 |+ ?! m& ^
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
6 d2 d. _- r5 |* {/ ~; P9 h- Y0 U- N5 @# `) U# j
我們的大學生/ v  [1 ]1 g9 ]
. D1 j9 _0 s' k: K% i

) ^" _( d( i! |: e2 g
! M1 ?5 N3 l: Y6 e- }" v) R! U1 L) U3 |

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
5 V# g, j( ^2 V  v8 K5 N4 l2 u7 |( t2 R5 h+ A

5 Y. {% j3 C0 l有見地 !!!" D& f! |3 x6 t' e
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.html1 Q# N. `  i9 t& q
# j* ?) |! A! h. i; Z6 m7 z% S
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 2 S2 B( m4 g7 m1 J) N
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 q" \* Y( J$ S
I pretty sad that about the University official.' Q7 P! [: Y* w/ x; I+ }9 ~7 w* y
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) X5 `, I7 N9 s% `7 ~

5 m2 u6 f' m) _; U) r2 M% V[ 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:$ q  T7 O: J5 A! v( R, m% C) i
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
! y- `* X+ b& t" U
! P% n  v! m/ Z[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

6 N5 ^: w; V- g4 v) C- ~

9 u0 `) g% ]8 E' R5 w! o兩者有何分別?9 }* x. \8 r, U* u
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?