奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
# @) l7 I& R' r% j: N3 J- _- u; D; o' x
agree,
. o7 _8 p. V' l! ]& [我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
- a; s  {6 T; [0 D但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,3 A! \7 R# w0 Y& K: }
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

2 s1 o% K/ |) Nhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html* E0 t; U9 Z( m; 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$ |, S  O8 ]0 O& [
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.4 G2 C( S5 J  p  r
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:' }) A  I! M; D( X
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
& l/ f- [+ C" r9 y  ?" {/ [8 y! [9 ]( h: F; T5 s) H
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
% T2 a: z: D# _# f' X; e: l* v; r4 T; F0 @( A) v8 @
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

  X# a: K2 M; P& I
7 m8 {2 W9 y$ F) ^% N9 c絕對支持啦
4 ~1 i6 }6 Q+ }- p2 Y- O
; r; l/ ]2 r) \3 o. \有錯就認,打就企定% k& k: ^0 v9 I. `3 c
* Q6 H' H& i/ V  U( o, e
無錯當然要撐到底. c, J- p, ]: E! c$ l- q0 ?  p) u, C
4 L. X: q' p+ N+ R8 Y# J* g* v
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
9 ^! Q  H$ x: G0 G( G9 O9 Q% @+ H' N- G3 z# N- J; h
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
( P; _# O+ I( m, G$ N& h$ N. t7 H6 O! i% x% Q, E
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力4 ]% n( Z( j/ }" C: k/ s$ j1 W
8 P# X. ~- y* f0 M9 v  b
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
; _+ I8 U' B" T' |* f' C" }4 r" `# [/ ?
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?- v3 o0 @0 Z# ?, k; Q
2 O0 e9 J$ s4 `, T3 Z3 r% ^3 s
我唔認為lor
- I3 a" ~5 j2 I# o: I& l  Y9 ]" o9 D/ b# C' C% Y9 |1 z
唔係話要整死佢地
& q0 J: t! |0 a+ d2 Y% [# [0 c4 s" M
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用' f  c, T3 a: u% N: J
* c7 y: M, J; ^
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
, Y4 D4 o# B5 I2 I+ a) k
0 |, H+ _7 m1 Q+ {7 I有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
. j  ]# @3 W; i9 T5 r6 ?4 c. d6 I+ {! @, K
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由* O8 X  O  W; n/ v/ |, e, H

% e9 E0 ], m6 d. I+ 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
' U# L4 m! I2 A"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"8 p# o, U# K# k4 o& U

" L) E+ R7 u3 e1 S3 h我們的大學生# q8 h" G# f$ C0 T$ ?' j
0 B: A! V, O, p: F- C6 s" q) C5 G, h
7 o0 E8 }5 U0 {+ E$ N+ X2 E4 O# L

& m9 }  Y1 }& a" B
: b" I* b' {4 ]  T# G* t

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
: P4 T3 u: _0 L( D9 \. a8 {6 E
+ n; k4 I& y  E' a! M& d' K) l
  }. T: Q7 T3 W, v; I/ Y% Y4 r! g/ I, V有見地 !!!; o( t& L6 `& e: N# s% v+ u* a2 K
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.html6 r6 }/ _3 Q1 O5 x

, ~: \& w1 d. e. w( g0 {4 e. d  @: \I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
- z& Y# N' ^% L- dI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
( C- y2 u6 r: v, U; SI pretty sad that about the University official.
+ |- o/ w) X& X2 g; ^% z  J3 Y; o( aIt'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
$ z" Z3 Y8 P0 G: E' A% u4 R  X1 T# H$ q0 G
[ 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:
! p2 R7 A4 L$ l: G6 T% f% _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+ U8 u5 T* o! ?; n
) K3 T, R+ t/ G' Z" i
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

5 H5 B4 U# W# s3 u1 A" k- x" V- J% w  p6 u
兩者有何分別?0 F0 b8 K5 Q, q6 Y! T$ K; y
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?