奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
1 D0 M9 B; y3 M' P1 l
) h/ q# c. C  Q4 p9 j4 ]: k+ _agree,' ?7 R0 e, w- V- L# I$ N
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,$ l0 O$ R' L6 p: u1 P$ k4 Q
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
; Q" _% w" @; S8 z* C) [期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

% P. _: n8 o7 ~
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
/ f3 M( k$ c* t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! M$ g9 B1 X0 R: N# x
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" }6 ~% m) [' j6 g/ B/ v4 qJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
0 S- e! Y+ }0 I; G2 r' A  L/ f! f有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ : A5 J" Q- c- O' [7 J
& u7 _% U" x7 c0 b# d+ Q! X
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
7 H& t6 R4 o: o9 ^% Q
' l# _; N4 m, `4 s3 F; x3 L為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

% m3 b* q$ g% t& t

7 g* g. x! c5 [8 r0 H% }8 b3 {- D絕對支持啦
1 T4 I, M, o# H& i6 j% S) H7 Z& i4 e; A  I( C% _4 A6 F
有錯就認,打就企定5 t0 ~; D( K, f; B2 U

; K* D& [) E' i無錯當然要撐到底! t, {# H5 ^8 x
" i# \4 {, g3 O7 J$ z
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
" R4 F2 R8 t; n' c
7 `% N) y! f( V4 s* y) w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 W8 p+ p0 @# S% K% a& ~0 H7 D

8 o1 b' n* |2 V7 m一份公眾讀物係好有影響力! j0 e& @. R+ @/ s' }* R, [

7 z; r/ `' q! t5 }& |: k% d我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生9 ~8 T9 G5 n% r6 f

9 M$ Z* h3 t$ n( l唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
- ]0 D# [8 Z& C  i) M
/ L$ O$ U; d* t我唔認為lor5 G0 Z4 z- z  \4 _
8 I, c4 s4 @! K' g7 N$ [$ x3 L
唔係話要整死佢地' B6 P1 S1 d% X  i6 ~1 Q- p+ D

6 Z1 h7 @, c  X' I/ j而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用$ E, Q) C' d' y$ @1 x8 s

4 S( a" `  g' \% n6 Y我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大. D4 t  V( i" i: p

  S8 K& z( n) C3 G4 W6 y' N有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
/ c- S# ]+ J5 |( a4 W" [5 d) W; f" r; q8 a7 g* d# h4 Y! z" w- \/ i
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
9 G% o# l( h/ `% s' y+ X; d; ~
7 F" s  b( t2 l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
3 B% Q3 d) o" q3 u' y8 I4 |"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
. u+ k% P% [# s0 ]0 k# w5 m2 M; U. e0 Z- r2 D2 p
我們的大學生  b% i1 n6 z5 }5 }" ^- |
5 t7 Y. b7 T/ o* q7 B, c5 v/ `

* p7 C0 f/ P2 [2 R0 P$ g3 h, _+ _$ r1 A& s
# Z( I, V* f6 l. I2 d- m

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
( q; \! E8 m( z1 B, q  B$ V" Q9 V2 C4 @( z$ r4 o+ s' V

3 T6 u# [3 P' I& e有見地 !!!
8 e+ M* b+ J5 e; 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. {) b. `1 x1 |0 w% n  n( p4 B

( d  e0 Z" H, m- \I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 9 ~( Z) X7 A0 _
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ! W6 N7 L6 C# C7 q/ v' v1 j
I pretty sad that about the University official.; C9 k, P& B, R# I+ Y
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
  [' s3 d0 D& O& D! A2 u# Z
' H% w  |/ g" p: J[ 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:' M' @1 J1 ?- P: r5 H4 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 la
+ z( T! u& p2 ^* Z9 Y- n7 N5 b( u/ S" F+ o
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

- R7 [$ N1 D/ J- d( ~( g# C- l3 f! ]6 u( v' [/ P
兩者有何分別?
3 ]9 y# {3 _+ ?2 W9 @8 S# O* I中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?