奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:! v6 s# Q% x4 X8 v
6 n0 k9 S4 O. F( c) Z' \
agree,
8 K- b9 w3 z7 k我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,+ v, [, q/ `* b# j5 z* ]& R
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,3 g* G- U) e" h8 _
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

6 G: k* ?4 V' V( A7 y
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html. w. U  s* d) P2 Y
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
& b, T; ]4 O' }1 `2 p, a) V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" ^: ]2 q/ B
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
, n. k+ R! ^1 f  o- A有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
0 a! O3 O, I2 m% U( G/ o7 ^
2 x; N0 P' l% o, i! p& Z* }係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???, x, O, o- Q6 N* I
5 X1 N  x( ^7 v: [! N7 v9 C
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

9 E, ?/ T# y/ Q* h) O1 S
+ e  h: V4 D% C0 q絕對支持啦5 u5 H, H& ]  L4 r
, K  X, J: G0 x4 u" I
有錯就認,打就企定
% M! i1 L9 d( X/ c. h
  w$ U2 I' h# L8 {' W( h無錯當然要撐到底
% A" D# U) e1 F: I1 w& \, Y3 x4 X0 x. O/ Y$ \
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩0 g( u) Z0 c2 k$ J: j* y2 r
, G, P& v& U7 E% s
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- S$ N( r& F0 p4 [: |6 J
7 z4 c6 @/ `9 C2 U' v9 c3 F
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
: c' u# L$ {7 M. I- l0 Y) T2 n, d* }0 Q" U
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
- y6 Q& {2 R4 n7 y0 ~
9 L/ ?! i, s9 ?& I唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
, K7 A9 l4 R6 K- E2 |
+ G0 b, y( ]& y9 A$ U我唔認為lor
: D+ b' e+ g- p; [& b' T4 J; H+ r$ T* Z+ D8 l
唔係話要整死佢地
# o. G7 H/ `& ]3 M# @: o) R3 n( \* l( C
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用- z+ x$ }. ?! {6 F
& s& O2 m0 }2 p/ J) n+ c. [
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大9 U7 {2 o3 Y7 v
" L0 @) {. n/ g+ {) p
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的( p$ S5 d. f4 G* e5 a0 ^) q, _* U3 w
  b& `2 ~0 d$ ~
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
& J" j% S# F5 x& a- f1 t
3 @- V+ I* @& A* }  a2 Q7 K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) U4 a5 F& l7 W
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
1 m) J: ~; n  h2 J3 V% X
# R3 D/ [- j$ b8 H) C/ m我們的大學生2 P% ?* r9 C+ N  H) [$ o$ {  R
5 r1 q; V3 J! t8 Y& ^$ e& `
0 x5 `4 v1 f1 W- u% D) L" Z/ Z

& p; P4 [! S' @& m+ u
5 |% _6 @! h, Q2 c7 D* W& M

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:) c3 w% c8 }: _& c8 g$ S' b

. A9 V, y( Q7 t* e5 x9 `% h' |% x# f4 |  `+ ^3 {) c  s
有見地 !!!
! X4 j2 b2 _/ S3 X* \9 I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
" s1 [2 f  z+ `+ S" q% \' `( a+ E" C) n9 T0 Y
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. / ^" k" o- C. [" T" j& 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. ! I* T3 j! B' D( a
I pretty sad that about the University official.0 X" Q4 Y" R0 s! ]% A
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
0 K1 V) N. ]0 q# U0 \5 E0 k7 i2 L, S. |
[ 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:  _( s- T4 N0 z
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
4 o9 {  \, W7 A' x6 _
- `; _+ X$ }  o" U, w$ M5 b% j[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

; E: @$ e$ Y& R9 V2 A0 W
3 M& {/ K5 i  G+ e4 K" H
兩者有何分別?
- P) A6 W& c( B: d( K% Y6 u中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?