奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:$ C3 i  E+ j2 _8 G* [! D
2 i4 O8 j* P# @3 L
agree,
7 z- s1 N- w! C: F& b我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
6 _- f1 ^6 p0 ?: f- A但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
: K" ?3 y1 a6 l期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

: ]% F9 V6 O9 G6 \* `: Y, l! ihttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
1 o% \# m# m! S2 V2 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
: j) m5 f, n; o! S( J3 ]! D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.
$ m/ q8 H0 {0 n! L3 K7 K& aJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:, Z+ d2 p2 _( Q
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
( z* i1 o9 U9 r$ Z) c1 m+ c1 v, R9 X$ B2 G$ t+ ]
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???* K! W# `) C% ^3 e+ O% K
9 x% M$ s1 g$ M, m# O
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

. P$ k6 I. Y+ u2 r, T
! w) H$ x* ~; `$ O/ v; g! e
絕對支持啦0 D# z  |1 g2 t' F8 H4 H

9 E- G3 K. {, q4 D1 X有錯就認,打就企定
9 k; s+ I  u  ~9 K2 X+ m7 L  v& j+ Z* q% D  v2 {& ]
無錯當然要撐到底( \! Y. r- b! A! f- n$ {2 Z) T  S

7 m" b: r+ X& n# a9 A但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩) O. s, c+ }$ N. O3 i9 r# ]  h
/ v3 _9 @  D4 S8 |
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6 p% f+ G/ ?: R) q) |
8 u; C, d2 r& T9 P7 j, j: l' o0 c' h8 h
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
' M$ {" L7 ?, L% A2 `" Z; e4 C7 l+ t0 x# |
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
, v+ O6 _" t3 i, y* `! ?9 q* P* {# l' Y
7 b0 @% B9 E/ B$ E& @% s8 @唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
5 F$ _8 s- r% @& @2 W" f/ H0 Z3 o( L
我唔認為lor8 U; }0 ^, d9 b! p
) ~8 k8 z- }, a* M1 V* M. k8 a' h: L
唔係話要整死佢地
0 ]' S$ h* z$ N+ j3 U
' ]7 J9 a7 @) _$ I而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用3 \/ O4 u- _8 W! Y
+ C! Z9 q* k2 |# O' e  L
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大  w  v# p3 G, F$ u' Y% k

: a- b4 W8 `  L* k4 M, l/ B1 M有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的0 T2 \! o4 \( y" t. J( L- Q

5 p0 t7 p6 R! h  o0 }4 h  Y; F唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由/ y# t1 S$ W. ^$ R2 J4 I: |& ?

$ W. _# a5 n. X6 Z3 n( 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 d, r; P2 a$ ]( L# |" y6 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"+ H6 n$ [7 H$ }( {3 D& x) S8 ^

) v& S1 H1 {) J- c# x) i我們的大學生
/ M* {  Y0 T4 u% }7 @
& [" d) ^9 b$ |$ P# H& O9 m2 _2 `( t) o' {

) H5 h. q" I- R* m+ ^- S) g" P6 r& }( c! N7 M( e0 i( n

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
8 B2 a, p2 m( o$ v' _4 u& z7 q$ {- \
7 e: a( ^  Q4 _- s+ |: L+ D
, J' x0 ?8 o5 Y- a& G* r有見地 !!!. }, ]9 `$ `$ @# h
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) i- N& Y7 B) x8 m, a

! y. U0 {4 f( F$ ^; m( d: `I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
8 j) P4 I& v& W/ C/ qI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
- K, J0 l2 M, Q5 m; z! ]% fI pretty sad that about the University official.7 p3 i6 d+ \% L
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
5 ~8 ?: v5 g% s5 d" u2 x$ ~% U% E- o* O% s% f
[ 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 17:24:4 O9 r* t" |/ P, d3 c4 r
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
& d. `( b; B' ?) v" W' S4 A( J! u
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 l+ A  G  |& k2 g/ H/ f. k
" g  h. t0 F* s( ?; L+ ^5 D
兩者有何分別?$ M  G' r9 o, ]+ ~
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?