奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
2 O- i) e' ?, @% |4 h- @8 ]
/ \8 a' K( U+ D- C! ]1 c( yagree,
2 y+ H3 d) j) R% i  L% s% V我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,; k  H$ h/ ?% @$ o/ y
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
) E. w! i1 z. ~' q/ [期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

1 Y9 @; g/ ?* h0 w& B' c" P) {http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html( B- b8 g/ W; R( W$ A" U; {5 S
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
+ C( q% Z5 i6 N+ R" G( N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.9 Z' K, B* E4 f4 Z4 z+ `; x- O
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
; H: A" r; x( @5 r2 ~' u3 `有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ( Z# q8 U; l3 P; c2 [
* l% l' Z# F  {
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
( f( L- c# q7 Z; ?  y/ ]' _- n) [
3 P5 \. ~% r+ J9 e為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

, _' D+ v( {/ n$ b2 X
8 ^0 A% Z: S  t( |* K絕對支持啦
7 ^  G  Y8 Q* x1 C; g' C* C9 o! H+ @+ Y% L5 E! [& b
有錯就認,打就企定6 z5 X( a- C$ T% T: |: x, y

/ V2 ?. Q) a, |* m, D無錯當然要撐到底' w7 |- Q9 }( B. t1 N4 s
- L; y2 G$ Z7 G% C4 I
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩* f; t: o* K& ^2 J0 G
# Y& \" m1 E% v9 D0 h. e
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" x4 {* u6 s, J7 e1 p" P4 ~

% n0 i5 b4 S7 e" v( p9 T6 }% k9 u7 U一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
! @! @: K7 p& l5 L
6 `$ ~2 C" z2 |: [( A; X  l( K我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
% B3 G$ n+ e9 j% D: m7 X, s7 y9 L) h" C' Z
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?& N" y* G1 ?! T! Y1 c3 C8 {+ {3 l& m7 b

+ v. {  Z) H% Q0 t6 J1 ]我唔認為lor
: F2 \$ u9 e6 {/ ?7 ?7 W6 b- \4 o' B, j# u. g! Y/ r, z( m% Z) l( ~
唔係話要整死佢地
, g: K/ ~7 X1 M; v! E% o" _/ t! p1 |2 V3 w
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用' `  V' S6 D1 v
2 E4 t" ]7 `# c+ C
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
' _+ q* S+ O3 o9 i% Z' P# e: q9 `- }6 F$ t0 W. r$ |$ N
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的( C& O4 f8 N& {& h/ V* s

5 n" i0 o* x4 L% q" y唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
$ A8 l" D8 }& ^0 L
& g  `" P! p0 d" P! R' e; G* X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
( G- C6 {( j* b6 p% w2 P"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"" q5 Z! O  l: A
& j+ s& r+ n/ z% f- \% g6 ]/ q
我們的大學生1 Z! s! V2 o$ q" E  B
) N5 h: H0 G) n2 N+ C" d
$ r' N' k( v9 \" ?6 F, Z

( S0 ^: K( x+ c, n/ S( f6 D9 H5 n, l6 m% @

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:% `% Z2 H* R$ N* i5 [0 Z
) t, Y9 p- D# C* x4 D# ^! L5 C

: i) j# @% F4 ~6 V有見地 !!!
. x1 w3 C: i/ d) V8 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.html- ~  A% Y. Z- Q) g2 V

$ V9 L" c8 l4 ZI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
2 |+ z) e: i, d+ C, LI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
+ n2 z: c2 w. }7 p, u: v! s, g: TI pretty sad that about the University official.
6 Z7 Q& t2 X3 j) rIt'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
# |3 Z1 g: B. H6 \8 K& _! X! ?" G; f2 u: `* _
[ 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 s3 j# |( E/ C/ Y+ L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  |: K7 b: {/ A# I2 G: P1 v2 X' d3 Z+ ^* ?+ m3 a5 K/ @
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

* n4 M! k3 K  W/ |4 R+ C; ~. `5 t6 |4 ]3 c+ @& G/ Y
兩者有何分別?
' w6 j# K- H! ~% Z) ?1 d0 h中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?