奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
5 `+ n2 I% \9 R" f5 }" J5 Q5 B) s) l3 s: \1 N0 `
agree,3 J! [% N4 p3 _! {& V2 T: ~
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,. z) y: c# B' R2 i) R
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
5 Y7 T4 g. ?/ G$ R0 y0 R( w& v期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

) D9 P% o" l8 W6 L
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
5 z8 {) {5 a; Q- V1 [. g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/ t3 v% c, E) n% t, r+ ^  ?0 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.- `+ t6 B( O0 m9 T
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
9 g# Q* `4 S' A有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
/ B: ]) J. d# l' Q7 q3 S
+ ^1 H. u3 j5 i) `( {係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???8 x: p% q+ v& d5 L2 ~

1 {( H, Q3 s( q& J8 N: }/ d為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

4 r, r# m3 \9 m$ F- _% n! i
+ i$ v' c3 U" r! m, M  b& p絕對支持啦
$ b6 Y  U$ `3 T7 [. q5 h, S* @+ H9 _
有錯就認,打就企定0 ]1 U3 C7 m! X1 D5 g

+ M1 L1 }- r: r  I6 g/ h  m. V無錯當然要撐到底
& u/ d; E4 {* h8 x' Q
! Z7 E, h% e$ x4 w但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩0 Q1 n" @6 ~5 g% I& ~
% u' [4 E/ C% T6 E9 {
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
: X. J. W  o' Z3 e- G1 v8 u5 O# n9 |8 F+ K3 j5 i* r1 S8 T( b7 V
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力1 H0 W5 w2 w1 J( H
; c0 l4 I* b9 Q: d. K7 n
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
# h3 u' h5 R( F; O  v' K! m  K3 z( k& h# p/ h" D0 C/ ~' C& e3 Q
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?7 ]4 i8 s4 m1 M4 \+ T: U8 \6 D2 R7 c

7 C/ F1 N: e& a& D, z' j3 {我唔認為lor
3 G/ W5 ~# l( U$ d
! N8 g2 R$ g3 P9 l8 h% I& Z唔係話要整死佢地
4 e5 j3 i  R% I1 R( E, h. c- I8 C
1 D" h$ q2 P  C7 e/ |而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用- X5 a0 N, R7 X( }8 M9 {
% e  _  c, q& ~, C
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大# H" y- W5 D6 ^% f

( f$ l3 c: z  y* y* T) L9 |有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
1 o" M' X# g+ L9 y! s6 n( y
7 d3 k' L9 b7 Q唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由! J" I4 M) C$ K8 l5 B
/ z" e8 m/ a  Z/ T" E
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8 A2 ]2 ?5 K6 K$ Q/ e
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
0 a. W9 s; d- x& t# v) b
" a0 T" m8 k7 l我們的大學生
* U: d8 m. k: E# {
. [4 x, H% k# Z2 z
( O; H" q# S# F/ E& g" ?, W. k- a: p6 Q6 E
& u$ g. D$ S, D

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:: g* W1 Q, h! d" \3 ]

* D* j8 r" \" }4 J1 x2 _2 c3 X
% I' [3 ~2 H8 h有見地 !!!
# ~) b+ ^4 P, \9 ]7 \$ G. \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
' f- S8 v. @" m# b5 W  h& {% X. `
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
* D: V0 d( ~# I+ `* oI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. * q" r8 T/ o- \, m
I pretty sad that about the University official.
8 f4 H# ~% c$ j" oIt'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& H0 d+ V& ?; e, D0 H
  F3 n5 e2 B! M7 l( h
[ 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:. f- o+ g: V8 b$ u$ ^# j: c
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) |' R. P) J9 C
# C7 w5 R! I5 U* q3 K
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

: w: D; R# {% ]
* D, w) S4 f8 g: v" E
兩者有何分別?  A0 b8 b7 E, m/ @% D' f
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?