奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:" {2 p* C* Y  n, \% M0 Q

0 V2 _8 \# X' u! y. eagree,
1 ~( u( q1 q' R% `3 l* I' {我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
2 d; \" U. {" R1 S8 d) U4 n但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,5 Q5 l, J4 q9 F; A
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

6 b! W. d6 A, J, V* r8 Y+ M( Whttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html! \( e9 j  n6 g$ d' T, V0 ^
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/ d: s9 r0 f+ u+ D# B0 Y# u/ W
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.7 q' n  U# z- R
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:" F1 t1 O1 k- S, b* T1 o! t
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
5 u! [; x; S+ _8 i; ?% ?4 r3 |% H+ K  y( h) S8 O3 {
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
; Y' }" R! O; ^: T$ i
! ?) v3 X. x1 ~5 o, }" a為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

6 ]% H- v+ E4 T! r9 @" w1 U; a5 J) _
絕對支持啦
+ ~' W# b2 E8 e& }) s( q7 o& l/ b: H9 ^7 a" O/ G
有錯就認,打就企定6 {/ ^/ r4 r. |
0 K& D  Q5 a! O; Q
無錯當然要撐到底
) ^2 G6 p. U# T# _" b. }# `7 L8 i* w
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
8 J, `% m- ~& |* D1 e0 w0 |7 H, F! y- ~
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' S9 [) P/ w4 l" x3 o* ^

+ T1 r5 I/ h( h一份公眾讀物係好有影響力7 c( l) \# C  T" q, e) K* r  ~7 O

; t2 }/ ~+ X9 F我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生8 P) m* r4 Z9 |; O/ b  A& `3 k
' N# K8 q* v3 ?+ v5 j
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
( q+ R; v/ V# G5 I" {
* g8 v9 k6 h. q6 G4 G. F+ K我唔認為lor' V# M3 d" h$ f$ Y; _1 j, T7 g

$ {1 b3 j8 _) F' e% @5 {; k唔係話要整死佢地
8 k' V) Y- D$ ?4 x: A9 ]+ s" L6 c  T/ `3 K7 {
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用# }- ]4 Q: U; t$ r: Q/ _6 {9 Q3 D

3 G+ K2 L0 c8 Z* d$ c. Q& A! E5 {我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
' D$ n: z& [5 N
0 q: E2 k( [9 I5 l) D有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的) m1 _4 ]7 X! M; ]% k8 U

% V; D! _( X2 _( e' o, w唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由, Q( @0 c# m( N$ z
6 y. ~) J2 E8 Q
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
" y, g9 ^9 J" K* s% g"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
* _1 n* D2 j# d$ b! c8 H( Q; B# `8 a* [+ h' h5 ^3 |# {' ^# r
我們的大學生
2 f' O/ u6 B% h5 v  A0 I: s7 x4 P  _1 u6 ]1 q
. W+ N0 o) }3 x, J/ S8 b3 Q

# W) t+ `, p$ b3 V6 U
7 U2 ]1 e7 q( p3 c: x5 k. O8 F% K

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
2 I. ~4 s* m: I- F6 q! {! c: S
; y: p1 d; J; C& \" D" c! v2 N( ^& V; c( F6 `% t" H
有見地 !!!( M: ~* h6 m; h9 r3 {8 u. T& e
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; |  m( w( C7 M" K; o
: O! ^4 I: \, g* R; Z% u9 a" s3 H% `
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 2 \! Q  N- I; K4 d
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
1 M- F; B" R2 ~1 g, wI pretty sad that about the University official." s3 C9 t1 r! ^# {8 F  I
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
# f! q' I, J# j7 N1 _4 d# |0 r- A3 \* t+ K9 q, P
[ 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:
. X  Z3 x: o* ]' h: f4 Y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
/ h6 K: v5 z2 P  e, k
) s4 t( V5 B3 j[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

' i1 F( I& |8 C2 d+ ]0 G
* D* M$ T6 k' v  O1 b% \1 |
兩者有何分別?2 `) ]/ s- Y% d" z0 Q
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?