奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
2 c! e9 l- _: O- J
( U/ o6 s. u0 G2 Z* X$ Oagree,
) I, Y/ E# Y) h* i# I我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
: }+ T- W+ D7 Y4 O但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
# p/ ~' T6 k. ~+ E& u0 j. b2 N期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

  n" S8 V5 @3 C  Ahttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html' r3 b5 g' \7 \: F8 B& y% q
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
6 M0 A7 G- ^# m- B1 v/ d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.
; n! }, h/ T1 Y+ Z( j7 m, SJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
4 e4 g, }- j5 B& _$ U有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ + d# |) j3 v" {9 }+ V

8 d' Y8 q& N! ?% H$ i! @" u3 I係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
2 g7 z8 u+ s7 @$ v8 c7 z1 E- _+ b+ D7 r/ G
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

! i7 {5 D! l8 ~4 N& }( S5 x  m' o, e8 B2 y1 X
絕對支持啦
9 l' A1 @9 X4 g4 N. d' x( k. d7 G# u; I3 L. ]
有錯就認,打就企定; V5 I! g" f! ?8 _

$ t) m% }$ X, D; e$ V無錯當然要撐到底# Q0 M" L$ R3 M& J/ S( f' g

- E+ z' N# ~2 ^5 d6 s  ~但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
$ j; H* i  c; O' n+ @
3 t  F( {2 g6 S$ S2 N  M( k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2 O$ Z3 J+ C6 N3 C

6 \8 Q* t. C& _9 J5 S/ o) B一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
$ N0 d/ h! b, q, f# L/ g' w9 g0 X' B4 c, j1 j8 ?  Q% z7 z
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
; M' g& u$ c! c
( n6 l! k/ c0 h$ R: l4 W6 x唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?: {+ J: Y' X( M3 h0 y& S, k+ r7 i

. k- ~/ E1 Q4 k1 B1 F- ~+ P1 R我唔認為lor3 \  G/ e, h4 W: r9 U. Y( ^

* p1 k6 Y9 X) ^+ s; I- X6 d唔係話要整死佢地( [" B+ U* m; ^7 A- C7 b3 u
7 A/ t3 u  Y- G1 Z8 r
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
8 e, O" f0 w* M6 f' C1 l8 j
* [) V' F9 [3 ?9 E3 P. Z' [& }7 G我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
7 N; e/ K# U7 m8 W" U: G  h6 |8 r3 \7 U* X1 ?  x0 C& U
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的; D6 d0 S5 f1 J9 a" [

- [1 ]; N, C+ ]- M/ A唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
$ f. C& F" I# w1 x3 @8 o& U
% E: ]5 z  O) J7 G, {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
* D  W9 j0 n+ Q1 c"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
: J! A( u; }2 E+ N! G% \! v7 k) u  b7 N/ y4 z; j. B" N! J8 r
我們的大學生% X; z7 v1 X& q7 C7 A) N, E, i

) S% {4 w+ u& C; l) K5 g
) v  }; b& V) K7 f  H
  k  @; Y/ c( V2 F2 W/ l5 r
. z# R) q3 O& b: g7 b6 c: q* q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:9 x+ V9 Z! m7 f! X8 C. x
0 i. k) a& z% p' T( Z9 ~( T

: ^8 ]- e  c7 _8 r有見地 !!!$ N2 F+ k- M& O3 V) `
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
$ B6 d3 }$ D0 Y( [, S1 A7 G
( }8 f/ x" e* g' HI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
5 j3 G& ?" l2 t7 j: [  ?I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 9 w: b% t4 Z3 Z8 V: Q, W
I pretty sad that about the University official.
: c5 p/ m- y  ]  s( |- r" H; SIt'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. g' z8 C7 k( \/ L4 i: y' }
* A$ Z# _0 e% Q- w
[ 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:" \! ]+ a7 m  n' s
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
6 b( Q0 z2 c* M4 v0 S7 D
* u8 [9 _6 ^( h- |; n[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

1 }6 }7 ~/ a% s# o/ f2 b" N9 t8 ~$ s
3 q* Q+ j" O* S. p7 U/ l
兩者有何分別?
0 O2 l# A4 J0 u# u3 `% ^6 m' p中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?