奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:% O: R0 w; V$ P7 w4 a! f7 g
! M" l/ G" H$ t# e
agree,
9 _# c6 i- S7 b( l/ U+ L我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,2 ~8 H0 |6 h4 O5 h
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
' g! f3 l  v8 T4 W! v7 {/ Y6 T期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

/ j6 B/ _1 ^. k& Z, b* E" nhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
4 H$ ?( F! q9 R- _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
' x& [: W' m5 G7 m$ }  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.; }! \5 c) ?+ h. [
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
- O1 E7 Y9 o+ Z& K; n有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 3 ]$ J$ C. K& M* }7 T# B' G
/ H+ U/ s; `& G# Y, m% F
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
0 b9 R- R+ C4 w3 H4 ^
' E2 E4 c: g( V0 c! J% s4 }) Y. G為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

, E: Y  `) t8 Z$ H/ N  ~" e

1 @3 Q: h+ X2 I7 q8 s/ g# p9 c3 F% R絕對支持啦
' D$ x+ Z# F/ |$ Z1 A8 @
# D! [+ d4 ^5 c8 d有錯就認,打就企定( ]. ~' f6 q& A+ K% c
1 b8 h' V! _/ d- K5 Z+ Q% Z
無錯當然要撐到底! X3 ?7 A1 J% M  j8 h

- m/ W9 Y: k$ d" @但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
, X; w1 c2 `5 d+ i3 X6 s: s) x6 m9 \0 m5 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
  s" u! A: Z& @, c1 v4 X) m: i: E9 V8 {2 v
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力  G/ ~1 u+ E( u) @) P- J7 B/ U

$ n0 G; c; b9 r% m# B* U0 Z我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
8 _/ X3 ~# j0 W8 p9 K+ R8 [
9 R8 U( T5 g  r唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
' c: Y' Y$ D6 Q; ~+ i
  K+ Q' k& X7 x, p0 O4 S- h我唔認為lor) b2 U1 a9 q: B+ a: \2 O

- g7 ^+ l/ m. R, J- z唔係話要整死佢地
' C# i! b3 j0 ~# B% w
7 H# V# Q7 G1 @, L; p而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用( t9 ~/ y2 n3 ~4 R4 L

$ w. O4 d7 m/ u& b5 N% U- M, O我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
: i& L/ U- g& ]- @/ f/ z# M. B* C! f0 \1 ?2 L; t
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
5 `; ~4 ~9 P! V4 u, L, f& q' W9 p) b, H7 r
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由" i# P, p' S& ]% v0 H9 C! ]
  U& W0 {  `1 s; g7 b: O' ?
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9 I2 V0 w, n) O) h
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"* G1 [, w" R7 e4 y
2 H& H; N- L7 i9 \; Q+ A1 }6 [9 d
我們的大學生
- J/ _( G, _7 M. {0 t2 x& ~7 D9 i$ D3 l1 w' P6 k9 o( P

4 H! b0 a+ N$ ]* Y& d2 G- y/ y; M
. J* v& m' z. V( z4 X
6 e' ]5 Q6 ?, V! `. u" E3 l) ~

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
8 q4 m3 T* V( ~$ n- J
$ E9 _' \. Q. X, j) E( ]/ x8 a2 v9 y4 v0 v# T- R* k5 w; C
有見地 !!!
, u: j6 G  |- F) d4 A+ X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.html6 ~9 e. ^) F4 F
4 ?, L/ U  F3 d9 H7 @
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 9 K. k" x1 {6 B$ m/ b1 U
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 6 x* Z2 b- H( j" L8 R6 i9 Y- y
I pretty sad that about the University official.7 Y% J+ D" R4 _9 @
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! ^2 k1 Q' B; h4 f3 J
* A) a2 }+ `! Y5 f  E8 x8 d
[ 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 17:24:0 J" k+ F9 q. f; t* k2 e% W
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 la6 f* B3 V1 U: m3 H* D
6 u. j7 `: e0 y( ?5 t2 z
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

  [9 C) g9 R8 u8 a
6 C3 E6 ]( Z1 B  l* {) G5 L
兩者有何分別?) b$ P9 W1 j3 E; M
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?