奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:- ?6 x- t+ c/ B& J" U7 p" C1 B
8 X4 W6 v! n" n! W' }
agree,% G6 Z% n  T2 W* d
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
7 Z7 x6 x8 X7 z" t但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,. d2 x+ F8 k, J1 K$ ]- @: m8 n8 E
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

# J1 [+ W& u/ t8 ^. o& Z9 Uhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
% U# m* S1 P+ o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
/ j0 \9 X* {' T, d$ P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.
9 i2 t: t- Q5 |# Z% fJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:: [7 v0 U+ R+ I2 M3 o& m' L
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ * G( `) D+ e1 Q8 Y* b+ K) V* \' c
! w# `) h2 j8 N6 I/ f9 C& N3 T
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
$ B+ y0 |3 ?1 e+ _5 {& S# u6 ?
( x$ w4 f+ p& ?9 u; A3 f為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

* }. l0 E7 p/ g2 ^6 r' E8 V0 D$ @8 q+ X0 M! F  A+ s
絕對支持啦
* r% h1 k+ H1 q- c* e5 \4 g1 n  c0 N: Z" w: @8 F. ~- V& J5 o
有錯就認,打就企定
+ x0 t! @2 Y" z/ r5 i" C7 ?$ E3 `& M* E6 W
無錯當然要撐到底
4 k0 F1 S; w& A# }
* I4 o9 p0 f' U但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩3 j! O: k! @* M! V
4 Z4 _8 H8 o( e' T2 u8 c
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' V( R$ s+ a# V
7 {9 T6 Y. ^+ w! V. `% Q5 t& \
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力% {9 H4 C9 Z5 l
% W2 Z) E- B0 T4 U# a5 H
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生$ I6 |# X( _/ S/ u3 U2 D

2 B" _3 ]  x7 D# b7 f1 I% g唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
( X- x" [5 k) N" M; \7 c4 l- r& W0 V2 \" C
我唔認為lor! `& n9 g7 ?! l1 q/ d9 w2 o1 S

7 Z, H$ o  \% {唔係話要整死佢地4 E' K- z* P. J8 G
# C% y# r; E- f* V) _
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用& i" z' p4 [7 @! L6 r3 V7 c5 d
9 f) v" R2 A! H9 o7 P
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大( }8 L% h, O% p1 \  `+ D  f% x; R

9 e! b1 q5 W" J2 y有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的7 O) B$ m. z6 w: `3 f; Z
' F; p2 ^# H& r
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由" s8 h1 e1 F% v" n9 ~& o' h; Q
# j2 V0 U+ A# Q) o" r2 {
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
4 N/ t) @/ A' N: s"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"4 E! z2 H: Y2 g

( {; D# f5 M. E" E! Q7 d" e我們的大學生
& F& s; ^4 D* l7 k0 N; ]4 q' d" o+ t, x, w1 y
9 ]6 m( J" X! ~2 {5 A

1 S& v; n9 T' i/ M
7 j5 y' T" b: p: d3 o7 ?" q+ L" Q

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:# \( k4 l  L9 }
( Y# R& ?, K, E1 ~- j

& @4 K- p' s  Q% e+ ^有見地 !!!) s2 q$ C5 ~- q5 X  m# U
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
3 K( m: r: _, L# _, i0 Q0 m. ^8 {! n/ c* V6 r
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 0 G7 M" v, B9 _3 |, T" [7 B! k
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. + X- ]6 d3 Z0 h: q6 G' w) b
I pretty sad that about the University official.
7 K: `; M& n4 r0 |* ^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 la0 \, m: F$ s" O  P

) L3 ]( O9 q# A: H) w  w, b[ 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 17:24:5 c, s( a  y9 z- E
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 la9 j! ~8 y5 w' k+ A
  |8 C2 |, `9 T) M7 T% `( f" G
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

) ]  ~; V( j  [% J" B) E7 _
6 V: L: T- U) f; H; h9 f  n- a兩者有何分別?
" o  v* s- I" N中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?