奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:; r+ V! k; P: w% i0 w) f
$ [5 p- z( r& U( k! r8 ]
agree,4 ]% Z' ]. |- w+ p; J
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
- z6 \# J; u& O* p但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,2 ^! o1 p& L9 J- r3 L7 D) t1 L4 E" ?
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

( s8 c: |  q7 [* lhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html5 e0 d3 E+ u9 S; 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1 g  g  H! {1 g; Z4 ]; n
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.2 U" ]' G; d# o* @7 z% t  v
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:2 c  G' T% n9 s( H
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
+ r7 t1 U3 z% L5 Q9 v; s
& m: Q4 f  b9 J3 i係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
+ [/ {( P' E1 \. @1 X
; G* ^( _' d9 s* Y- Q為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

/ H8 _1 u8 g0 ?* l4 B- G
) s, {" O, p( c& ^8 L- i1 n% f絕對支持啦
2 W  W+ Q: W/ Q1 T' S$ @+ t; @$ O7 Y7 F9 m0 i; ?  _5 n
有錯就認,打就企定9 y& d$ s% I* d+ H! K! T$ M. p
, r; ?/ P) i% A* @
無錯當然要撐到底# P0 X1 J4 @' N4 \6 ]+ M1 @
3 H8 P: M/ |! R
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩7 s% w% y" Y+ m; }8 H6 ^

3 N9 N3 w9 ^9 T' A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; k  j" K. `; E/ d0 V7 g/ y4 q( x
" f2 K/ X4 V- P( x! g
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力% [# {; E4 l1 `' J' k7 Z) v# d9 ?

. d, L0 x4 c- `4 s; `: z% A; E我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生5 J6 [, b8 t6 ?7 o/ Y

1 E9 k5 J$ ^8 c唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
' d% e( W! b/ D6 g4 ?
+ a4 R. X1 Z, w我唔認為lor
7 b2 C; q# l7 S/ E8 z. A; d* o  x0 Y
唔係話要整死佢地
) G7 V- V! ^3 T6 I. d4 {5 C
. y8 ?+ y; p6 r+ y而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用5 X( j3 E' U( z. C- `
0 Z( B3 K! z# [- x& Q+ h
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
; C* }: ?: ~1 x0 q/ z0 `/ ]7 d, l& n7 Y9 J. h: w$ {8 k
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
# s' R( B2 J% \8 q  C# m; C* c( K3 a
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
0 X9 r4 p  N  v1 t: c8 v9 z3 \1 \
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
5 y( }, Q9 {/ C, h+ X"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"" q, b& F; Z0 O0 z
# A  O% K" |- I) I" T1 Z" r
我們的大學生
$ D! U/ ^% R7 ]* y+ a0 e% ^( @+ v& ]# P5 V! C

& l+ u7 l% U3 P5 a* R: S+ l5 @
6 a( [7 `6 e, y' y
% T0 n; A; v: G& r  i. }6 t) k

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
& V) b5 ~! ^5 u6 t$ R  N  L" z9 {, G4 q1 z
( K0 D- W6 B5 u' D
有見地 !!!% q& ~; B4 c$ @) m! Z
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
7 }$ U8 O  u4 d, ], F, @9 {0 E7 M" s  K* m5 m
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. ; T0 l: B: w, Q5 w
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
8 C, r" }4 h8 u5 N+ WI pretty sad that about the University official.- ~- x" E( F! m9 m2 w& ~
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
7 l" T1 p+ T- d, o
; a' Z# B! q# X" o, 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:
: h; K& u$ c* S1 c7 t2 |7 X9 A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; O  x/ v7 l! T7 t
6 ?+ j  l- b. ?
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

" _9 N% b# G* a: k8 J8 C9 E) V0 O6 p' k3 s  o+ J
兩者有何分別?
) N. I; U9 Y2 \, e1 Y7 k中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?