奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
5 k0 o. E: g" M+ O& x+ M% m% ]$ I0 W- X8 N: Y
agree,: [" Q8 l" q! Z  H' x
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
( e+ _( Z' j4 u" d, m但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
8 o/ ~7 W" q) t期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

, |0 y7 @6 W+ \2 x  v, g7 |http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
$ w( n1 a6 P2 ?- @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
1 q. a+ Q" Q) N0 H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.
+ N# T( g. z7 D# _Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
+ ^# T5 z; [& j% C4 X+ ^6 w) \有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
, k' G! k* L! A1 o8 q0 p! A$ \+ I) t) |+ p
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???; ~3 l+ n4 a9 q& M5 Y3 C
2 W4 I2 u. h6 G5 Q
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

$ C" @7 t& Z* I% B( D2 @5 [; Q( j  g( K! b; T4 m  x
絕對支持啦3 ?' e/ ~9 Z- M4 D! m4 O" a
& e8 W; A6 U$ \2 `- J1 X3 A
有錯就認,打就企定9 H. i7 \9 w+ H; N
# ~# y- r  C4 x3 ^  e/ k
無錯當然要撐到底
4 A& \6 T6 c, a. P
- j, e; D2 y9 r4 A; X但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩9 N1 `: J. b  g, @
2 x& x# N% a8 ]# N! l0 Q1 ^) n
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
! i5 o  F9 w7 N; E* ^
5 d: }  E" S; ?/ p8 t- ?一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
: n7 q' s0 F" p, v4 z! w
1 S, F; E3 O6 V2 p2 e我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生; x6 ^9 N! O; l9 Q" c/ b
- a# z' }% i  S0 Y3 |2 |
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?0 G) K8 @7 \& T( _9 j/ q

5 m7 X; ]  C" d2 O! a; @我唔認為lor
- ~' b; C0 v+ ~& e% q/ }$ H
' ?; D* h% p3 `6 u唔係話要整死佢地
5 x0 b, l6 H  O4 J6 l1 S5 ]. m" M4 n5 {( A
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
" |6 K, e6 ?4 q( C+ V# }8 K, L) E+ S# s- a) ?( x. A4 A3 |
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
0 P& i1 J) O* t- r* G& f  [1 P
% ]$ U# w6 r! j有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的# ~. y; w  V8 F9 l+ b% A* C# u

- r5 ~8 R' g" T+ u* X# W唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
' N% ?: D) Z" \& }3 y3 _
  \6 l8 S" ]9 j( a! i$ p" I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
. S9 L, |: `& y- L"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"7 [$ p3 |" d1 C0 w- t. F( |
' @, y, D: R, W
我們的大學生- j  \6 o7 d' \

5 |: w/ A* Q6 s  T+ J" G! r+ J9 F" G; e  j- [, Y" i

6 ]* i3 l1 |% z, m
/ y: W6 e8 N& U0 s

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:( Z; q' d0 L4 s
5 H  D! a  ]! ]- \
3 g# \% [# r# Q6 \
有見地 !!!! @: O2 o, `1 H: s; J7 q5 u8 D6 [$ J
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
+ C. `2 Z$ `% ?8 s( n; ~9 a9 x3 E" O. E. C: p3 T" h
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
  i/ n; ]6 p* H; `( f8 f3 DI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
" ^0 R5 g* k* X& AI pretty sad that about the University official.
$ n- [4 f0 N8 Z& _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 l% k/ |, v5 C, w
5 \% _( @+ h! [7 v, q
[ 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:& T) A* v9 H' {( K0 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 la
* \7 T0 K/ L/ ]) m2 c! w) y; _( w  G3 w7 \
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

; t1 D$ V; }8 Z  \1 J9 ], ^# h

2 f; N8 R5 s: U0 I6 n兩者有何分別?# c0 o9 j" X" a0 M- u
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?