奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
/ }/ \9 I3 {6 f  `$ o' Q3 W: c; {3 m+ _+ ^5 L
agree,' v8 k  y" s0 C8 S6 \, k
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
: `3 t. W9 L; C+ E3 d8 i4 U但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
$ y9 C5 I: W( V% b5 ^/ ~' n( W$ O期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

' l3 G6 F4 q# {
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html- k' e' l9 T  L$ T7 I$ 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 q$ f# S' t9 R$ [. ~! 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.  D2 @' A* l* N& u+ ?9 W
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
( O3 \5 @. S* |3 w: l* i有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
, x$ J; ?# Z) ~4 e# j
2 d3 Q( P) i) D- v係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???/ [$ R) f5 F7 L- Z3 ^6 b7 |1 \8 T

8 O- x4 p: I8 @  c為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

$ {% i) w5 L0 c7 N* _1 B1 B4 I- t# t$ e5 @* H4 ]" ~- }7 d9 u$ V
絕對支持啦4 O$ n$ N1 |# p+ g% v
7 Y: s/ T2 S0 ~/ G
有錯就認,打就企定( I2 T4 {4 v8 ~3 a, j8 U2 _, x

3 ~* W  H& I2 _& h無錯當然要撐到底, U3 w* k3 v8 Q
6 ~+ y. j' S; {
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
' d6 {! E( V# @- Y- O9 K  g
9 p2 ?6 E3 ?. R, h. l) {7 O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
# G  `  @0 C' S; }
0 D: G9 A0 a# f/ E$ S) `& A一份公眾讀物係好有影響力2 m0 r1 X# l+ V) r" Y
! s. a8 ~; q2 P0 Q# Y8 K
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生' J9 y) I1 k' _+ O

8 O2 s  v9 g1 k2 K) {" C唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?/ R& y. F2 k, c9 x5 W0 H& w9 j
0 r' U9 w' X# n9 ^* b7 ^; t
我唔認為lor! j+ V: @) F+ ]  ^" z7 C
) S+ v6 N5 B5 U& Z
唔係話要整死佢地
9 p0 W; C4 I  E- B" {/ |0 e( M6 @% T/ {9 Q. \
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用  n- |! E, e6 n, M) g$ c

5 @( S3 v: u5 g) S我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大- h6 H/ f& L8 o3 ?. l( X0 ^

3 r* v. v: ]  ?/ S有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的" o7 B/ L3 A: q) X
" U% k, v' D) C
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
% O2 W3 b* F. \" w6 X% x4 V
+ |! D$ _- k3 v6 a+ ~/ H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
" v% J& {. o9 d; \: |"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& J2 g' C3 `- ~3 O- O/ A# q, l. A

# Y1 W+ u8 X- B* d我們的大學生
  o! Z- H$ P* j; l
2 K- }/ @% a5 @: m/ X# H4 m: K5 H4 Z/ m
- _* o" q' A# e9 m3 e6 y% F# i
0 F# {3 `" Q9 b7 ~" d! z3 F# ]

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
0 u, d  @; d8 _3 D5 S, t9 w; r1 [$ S; e4 z; o8 E9 m$ ]

7 K7 c. a" y) ~0 f/ [( ?9 J有見地 !!!
. k/ a7 }/ J0 z' g+ P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
- U! ~. K1 D/ ?) S. f# e8 z" |; m9 a
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
3 u+ s6 M& M1 N9 PI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 3 S! X" E3 n6 D/ Q# k
I pretty sad that about the University official.
+ W$ W1 T* @  d  j1 ]- O4 fIt'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 la5 L1 v, a2 l7 U+ t0 R

: j/ r$ Z8 w  G' f( x. S. n' ^[ 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:
2 Z" N7 A' u8 Y( h( D# |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 la5 H" e; ^$ I& [& l

& K5 j$ w. b. }; L[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 \2 D+ [, R0 z: @7 ]
6 a% j, T# m0 C- D9 T8 y4 C8 V! K$ F兩者有何分別?* J& l8 k: t4 p5 l. ^. H' \! p
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?