奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
) h6 c" C& x3 e& n5 }
$ h' x# K) N5 V+ j: [agree,
3 B1 ?# o; [8 v! V% a我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,3 ]& b% q, @: k
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
+ f7 Y4 a5 i% V  x期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

) ]/ w1 l! [" _. B4 u1 p
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
: g- e. q; J% g0 s4 `- [" N# b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
3 \8 Z! C  a3 U$ }8 H$ M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.
, ~* u# E( n( `8 _& G& NJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:5 @- {$ l( p) s3 Y, z
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
+ F! [( Z/ l' y& c3 P+ i
) B7 P/ R" G( y% i# q* b係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???- M2 M; @$ J/ ~; D+ ~$ t* m

6 K: O4 o. |2 _2 C' x為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

: r9 ^  O1 L! ]: u) u0 z! l: B& u
; T7 G1 Q& _) r: w* c, j絕對支持啦
7 U* ~3 R/ n" ~. k% M+ d6 ?& H! f
有錯就認,打就企定" ^* q/ p, Z% [, J
: F! U$ C$ m% A( Y3 O7 \5 X' V
無錯當然要撐到底
: e7 A0 R5 \* S5 E1 v1 |: U' y* ~6 S2 n6 L5 E' w; ~/ b  m
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩) _# W' L+ d3 L- u

/ o2 \9 n/ o' e1 p4 n# R5 M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7 z* I+ J- V0 ?$ \1 }& I& `: U  f, K

- K" ^) ~, |9 M% f( X一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
# U0 H5 U- R# N
2 W+ Z! e/ V% z% Z我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
8 i+ [, [9 U: y. `: S  B$ Y8 l; ?
" a8 |# P8 f  D8 C3 g: ~; k- h& x唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?- \# z4 f  s" X4 o. @( p8 |. ~* l: u

" B5 A8 b" s2 V. ~我唔認為lor
1 m7 `( Y2 Y2 |9 S* D( e/ s! V9 |" a- ]
7 e* c4 S4 y7 [8 D唔係話要整死佢地  Q2 M) v: ?* a- u) w* d/ }
. b7 t) l" k6 Y$ f5 r
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用: Q  G) w- d3 Z& T5 u, }

2 N% i0 t  @$ N- a我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大' g" `, d6 f  e& r& ^

1 E1 L$ q9 a0 H' D3 ^* X有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
5 a0 F( w% W( U1 z- J/ [6 v7 A, I& @% p5 _/ ]5 m% B; c" F- O" o, _
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由" I, ^7 k3 r( D0 C$ ^+ K- B5 {. D" Y
. a) N# y( O/ F/ n' n& {! G7 h" 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
7 k: ~$ n! X- `0 G"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
2 m, Z- U( M1 h' N* `, Q/ J8 N0 R% e
* i) X0 l4 w  O' M# l# [" O3 q+ H8 S我們的大學生
( q# S! n0 L1 ]# {
  G. @& b% |: K) o1 U2 R& n& a: j
  s  \/ ]# ^% n8 C, @
# H# b3 W1 m  }. `5 G; M; d) G8 E! P) l# v

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:8 S' m8 o9 D3 a: U

0 k+ V6 X7 Q3 t& c3 N0 Y/ g# j* w5 J* P. v) U) b; r6 c! q+ Y
有見地 !!!6 Z9 b# D$ R' u9 |* M) u' l
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
0 Q" t8 q: y2 U9 n5 u
' _: r( H; P+ S+ tI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. / J- I& b. L3 h* n# A
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
0 A# S1 K7 `4 N9 ]3 D9 e5 VI pretty sad that about the University official.% ^6 q- x" e  A) c
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 z& d2 B/ l  J) d' O% H( G% ^) x
[ 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:! v. |6 `0 [2 T
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 la0 c3 u2 {8 T3 L, |' i* ~7 m

- R0 M" \' f  z5 Z" v+ r5 M[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

. N% z) L4 b2 g- F3 _+ y- U, C; N
兩者有何分別?1 Q5 h: R6 N8 `
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?