奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:/ B' w, ?7 F: f+ w

: }5 Q& ~' I' f! M/ G, j7 Yagree,
. M% r2 Y/ m- v% g" t! w1 t8 ?我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,9 k; o  x* f' h" N" K: j
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
" K$ J  I( Z* G8 [5 L3 A/ G期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

- }4 D2 p" a+ Phttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html/ t( J5 s4 D! U- O: u' K, b! _8 {
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# |; D/ N4 u8 \! }
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 m5 [2 U6 G* {# j% M0 S
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:  F) S4 W; F+ c" ~& m6 B* j5 h
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
; i8 Y8 B$ `# a9 [' L# C+ I* n6 ^, m/ y
/ \5 R3 Z' G& A9 W) n係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
# P# N6 d: k- e% i1 t1 F; Y, _; D  \6 p* L" V0 B% _/ e
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

! b9 m, H& C! o8 D) ?
% ?. k8 ]5 V) p8 Q7 c% r絕對支持啦
; e$ V5 L% h) Y! _7 }3 H1 c, B, K7 x* [" ~, v: [" w3 j1 ^
有錯就認,打就企定# S3 ^+ J; N4 h$ x4 j2 ]
2 i$ q3 u0 q* ]: |) B  v
無錯當然要撐到底1 F2 N* _4 o, s& N3 L+ X
* G! R2 [' v; r2 j2 g, R4 S
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
9 o) _4 U; I1 p! d* W
7 \8 @- G2 y" P$ Q4 ]4 }  L9 i+ Y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5 G! ]4 [+ f4 `8 x/ e% f
3 j% q2 |4 D( p* D
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力& e* ?/ f7 }$ G: |

% @, D7 ?, p7 h我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
; T- |! J& J6 n% _5 t; {9 m' O: L& L- z' a* o! r
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
7 n2 e; G5 [7 |' s/ }4 Q# U
# V: c3 ~0 Z, k3 R* H# A2 N我唔認為lor
' p- P, [0 M$ j/ e4 E9 Z: y- w3 f1 o* a( c, m
唔係話要整死佢地
4 o: Z1 |% L4 p: H, x& m- o$ c
2 g& F0 M/ _- |& k9 S而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
$ v' d3 O) n0 z$ w( ~5 g" h- [
; g- b$ P# R% z6 N1 _! s我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
! I5 Y$ f( [& |& U  E& p, A0 |2 }/ R7 W+ F# v8 \
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
& g2 }7 Z+ n+ j. l% i! r( W) S- A* w$ M8 D) u# I2 r- b( }
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由! V$ Y( ^! E7 v# @" s( N

0 H. ~5 K8 @5 Z7 n! {4 `2 K2 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- J4 p0 c5 z% z9 N, O0 j+ {( 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"
8 N) B: R. [1 z0 w% A( t8 {( ?! V5 F- K) F
我們的大學生
9 S4 \$ z) i$ T
3 G( \8 p8 V! ~' @5 u1 T
2 [" {2 y" }$ ?7 q8 w+ y% h) L$ N5 {9 h0 R' \  \% K4 \
( `4 h$ t" Z: B! [) }

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:3 q8 W2 c" o6 t: U0 j* b* f; N

- Y0 w4 x' l5 ]% Y+ b
* W6 x/ C( G% \4 C' [/ A+ K8 ^有見地 !!!9 n* [; x, t3 H* a) P- ~9 e8 I/ m
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
% v8 |2 S4 @% m, j- q
) _' M" h3 N7 R! H6 DI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
2 _& G0 x! p$ T8 P& KI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
9 d# N0 y0 @: ]I pretty sad that about the University official.9 C: t( b4 f( b; a; D* ]
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
8 x& x" C' ?  ~. q- b
+ D; q8 U$ E" K. ]& f[ 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:
6 Z4 Y3 ]" Q( Z0 n9 d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
5 q! L/ C$ x7 }# b; F5 {" k+ ]# ^/ c: N: g
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

4 U; C2 p0 S5 {8 l
/ s5 K  G7 @3 F5 ~- z兩者有何分別?
: b4 N' l& r: h, n$ d) N  t* s+ I中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?