奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
5 J, }. d8 f9 Q$ {. h8 Z; u" u4 j7 B& ]$ w
agree,
$ J6 l, C8 z4 v1 {, b我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,) \4 \0 f" W7 i
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
; r8 e3 Q" b9 x9 J: j( P% A期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

- `7 G% E" |9 C' Z/ P. r% Mhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html% w0 e# T' P- \3 e
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
4 h4 r5 K, i; V9 z1 l9 F, b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.( c3 R( ^9 k6 f
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:" L3 F$ c: G* q0 u2 p+ v
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ . r) y/ u; J5 K

+ {; I9 b* `; F, T  Z( V  Y  q' }係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
, t9 y( {" R" r) N- k3 _5 o9 ^  i9 _! \6 S4 ?
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

2 d1 X: a- i- S& k. N# N; H( x6 f3 [( J: I
絕對支持啦
) T9 `, D. u3 m0 ?1 G* }+ u, l; O
0 n6 d& I# n4 [/ q有錯就認,打就企定4 y. Q  u" o% {" d* O" j' q

4 t3 c7 ]% Q1 h. E( Q$ e8 g2 J! E無錯當然要撐到底
+ M% `+ l) p) T0 Q1 u+ e; t( p. {) r
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
0 s3 v" ^0 ]7 L
: C  {5 m8 K/ e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
; L3 w" z9 V; o, E
4 s# Y& I" _$ c一份公眾讀物係好有影響力( L' W/ r  z! ^+ c  ~

3 Z- _3 G0 \0 V, X5 Y2 I我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
) v" K5 c2 ]0 F; u2 F# N' b% l# Z; x: f/ A4 D3 c7 q
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
* D( b/ c' z  j- f
$ J, x: b5 a. B1 r. A3 L' I我唔認為lor0 K& @- S8 T( K3 |* z0 r
+ [, i0 e, N. a- v, k
唔係話要整死佢地
4 h: |7 ]$ t! m
" D8 g$ R1 e4 ~( ?8 T- p7 Y而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
9 A0 s$ A( Q3 K. ?3 N
5 l2 q0 v& Y5 H0 {$ G" }6 N. A我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
& B( b! L, A9 V% @; g5 O
/ [. P2 k* A9 V3 ~/ J/ ~有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
. b- s! L. _" D$ s6 ^# s
9 B2 ]1 j! J, \+ x唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由% Q& }4 ?1 V* }# ~
1 j! h4 P8 T' v1 W
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 C& V, F7 s) w1 v+ `
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
; H/ x' |, k0 s3 e) Y% h+ g2 ^7 d1 |$ j0 B( O' H
我們的大學生# F" Z7 \, O. z; l. l2 \

0 m! ]1 k, {! ~% u8 \2 C" g0 g: s+ \, \2 n+ @
* |/ W$ B) U+ z: Z1 G, F  L

" I! j8 q5 c- t: x

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:8 x* h: D7 p- L! d* d& O6 F

6 D/ R' V' r2 M* F1 p9 W6 l+ b; l9 n4 i  ~
有見地 !!!) B( V- {% S9 \1 X& ~% I2 c
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& K: P+ L+ i& [! p1 t

, n6 V4 q4 X6 y& k/ AI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. : U2 A* A* D8 t2 F0 @+ ^" S
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 7 W) u9 [  h, j$ Y* u
I pretty sad that about the University official.
5 Z: S' a. ^6 N0 O: J) e% D/ NIt'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' {: D6 J- P8 B* r

' j* ~" {' {9 e[ 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:/ G# k7 W) K4 n. Y7 s5 Y
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! U; _8 M# z' b( T0 f

4 y2 S! {! }# |[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

9 W: \& H1 f) p" R8 N; D. D( L/ Z
  Q2 Q( S& y- U: P5 V8 D
兩者有何分別?9 }; C. V: e- l' s
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?