奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
: e% s! b5 w# v4 L* B/ r4 e, \* t8 h/ L8 o$ K
agree,; G! Q* t7 g1 ?* r; C: `3 ?# Z
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,9 B3 `8 f: i; y4 \3 m+ N
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,+ L- |& S/ R* y8 d
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

* r2 Q; a+ n+ b: A8 H+ f8 i/ l2 K
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html, n8 u' y  E8 ?& H7 n8 p0 {7 e/ h
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
( E9 [, X$ ^4 ?' t. Q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.
3 l2 u/ k! l9 I& p, H0 S5 QJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
" e8 \" ?% ]0 Z  P; P8 c3 `1 w有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
6 I6 R9 e* k% T
9 @4 d0 H$ o7 m係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
9 {  Z9 \/ Y1 O( e
+ v6 l( ]' T. S- T為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

+ |+ C1 D2 ?4 m7 A% y$ z- [  L4 N
1 M% ?" n  P% ~1 f
絕對支持啦' e% L  E2 N; Z7 _. \, N
% D" u* N" j% B' o
有錯就認,打就企定
. G# A1 b" @& T- y6 ]  K8 R! ~3 Z$ a3 z: f& ~" G! h7 [' _  C" L
無錯當然要撐到底% K: R/ N, ?( O- J1 }2 v

& |( F: a9 a  f7 x但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
! Y$ Q0 H5 R, g( ^* _1 K7 G7 x0 r" a5 y6 x
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& h3 O' y1 G& D

# C2 b' D+ f* Q' W6 T一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
$ p7 {8 j" {/ z  ]; ?
: F6 C" U! o9 |8 I" Y% v我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生, h% C0 f& q5 }, G! ~& l

' N2 U4 v7 Q: J5 A4 r唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
' m( ~* {+ S  T6 w; u8 E7 ]3 n  l) N/ s) n7 g7 S6 g3 t
我唔認為lor- P3 k" I' k% R. ~! K

( m0 ^" P3 ~$ T3 _8 w4 ~唔係話要整死佢地
0 @7 l5 ~. w0 I% L7 P' }' g- P6 m/ i$ V6 C$ h: u
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用# X+ d3 g5 b6 \; O

" w( V, l# a+ ^; q我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大) R& Z7 f& C* y# B' ?% Z/ K
6 {/ V( g; y% J0 @' Z
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的  F3 J; i1 \  y4 A3 Z+ b
1 C: {8 M  e1 p6 C
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由, v2 \7 |% i+ v4 z; z, p$ U

! d' ]$ B( ?- G7 b3 S4 g# [: \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
" Q1 |' d) ~* r1 B"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
! R0 q) \7 ?4 ^  C* P/ K  B" N3 h
1 l& ^5 X" \* {3 n' n+ m( q: b我們的大學生
3 c# y" C7 [8 T! i4 c2 w9 \' L
$ `+ e, {5 U4 E2 g- w0 ?
3 E: Q$ h+ T, S7 d9 ~. J
$ y; ?3 O8 E( v* d8 M$ x% T, @
3 ~+ h* o, W1 e( a6 Z7 X5 Z

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
3 r' V& r( q/ f
& s' B5 M5 f6 U6 `7 U/ d2 e! z% [' }3 y8 j4 u
有見地 !!!- k+ j9 l6 Q, G% _, \2 f
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.html9 W: ^2 T, C* ^5 a; w$ e

* e4 n) f1 ~9 Q/ h4 o2 F& b& x% II think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. , g, }2 m1 S% O
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ( p! b1 u- w  }3 o2 K2 g
I pretty sad that about the University official.& m* J. y% d$ i/ V! j- a
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
. l( S. q/ D. r# H8 w2 u+ e1 E7 `: 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:
- N$ q- d3 {4 @" I* G& [4 b- 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
0 E" C3 F! o/ F- c: p7 x
2 j- ~$ E/ q! B[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

$ [$ }( P3 P* ~1 q' Q6 [" _
1 `# o- l& x6 L* G9 M
兩者有何分別?+ Z1 J7 c) Y5 J  E  N8 D
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?