奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
- g, F. D8 L5 `3 r& f5 E
* N0 I2 _) d- Q3 S: [, Iagree,
: U2 }. G- o/ o, A' n/ W  R+ V我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
6 s1 g3 b' @+ C. v1 O# K. I, z  A但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
4 H! D' J) u9 o" ], q2 F. }" z& n9 i期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

9 B' ]0 p9 s% y, N6 O
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
/ U& W" q, q/ }; V# }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
0 T2 C7 g0 {- B3 D2 `$ t7 U* B5 `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.
& e# J& \" {% kJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
& ?7 i) Z5 z% L! H有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 2 @0 m: h1 h2 k8 V) z
, {' V  j/ J' c
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
; P, a4 }9 t- ?# ~* r6 }1 ^1 [! o3 Q* ~; R' D! Q
為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

0 J$ ^0 h2 g. x; ~  j0 R

5 g) E; ?" I, J- H) J4 ^絕對支持啦3 [% E5 D/ U. Q1 J7 n9 P

( @* H/ x: ?% H9 F, {2 O7 I2 g$ u有錯就認,打就企定
+ m% C% ~, m% e1 q# A1 E% @4 y5 A% Z1 V* T
無錯當然要撐到底
0 [* X. z& i2 ^8 w$ d9 G# K1 t- A# }2 s. `# F7 F0 I
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩+ S2 a/ z0 v* B' S7 ]3 b
5 T6 U& N5 l# m- Z
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3 V$ g, d, _: c: J) m# h6 h
7 I/ z* _* I: }! t2 a2 q
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力/ q# E0 m9 k2 ^/ ^! S! d  b9 Y, W: v
, J. ]! }3 s( L! S
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生! R, j; ?- k2 p, ]' S% E* N

* {* S! X7 n$ k8 G  o唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
& f  e& }0 `" ]2 q: X2 y% _
8 \6 j; \: m0 Z9 n& Q1 o2 l我唔認為lor
7 Y# P/ O& S" E, j6 P& }( ?  ^+ H
/ h: P+ z- S; ^! \唔係話要整死佢地
( ^& e! L& m* S+ Y
7 T3 m( F$ \; h* c+ h% r3 A而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用# w5 r/ v- P3 |+ m6 Y: W

* q# f) {( q% C* Z) P1 M我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
% E, W; l% F! l, h+ h: d; f0 f* w& F( l: R
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的9 h3 a5 ^8 e# a  L( X
4 A' S8 _: v. a4 N; H& f" }
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由6 t' p+ ?9 C6 f5 e: ?3 I
& Y# v$ S$ }2 q3 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
2 Q3 s# f, ~& v& \- T$ j"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
9 k: W. n. `9 R, Y
" Y; o3 \1 y8 |4 B  T3 m0 {/ d我們的大學生
) b. j8 S# p# J& i- X8 f) V& ]$ }. J9 L) X" ]6 p
: ]- ^7 _) c) d. t) a, _
5 k1 ~, V. E( v, i6 `4 H3 m  [
6 @! [2 n3 ?, V- I

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
" d0 {; Z' S( E  U! z* B5 M& J1 m1 y$ C# \7 N$ |) |# X; n1 J  c
$ f2 P; Q! G% ?
有見地 !!!
! J3 o6 `) |; l/ p- E: h- Y' `( 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' l2 j/ _9 E9 s, w( K* p9 b

6 b% i  Q8 L  ~1 y1 j. gI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 9 F: ~4 d3 T" i  P0 J
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 I2 T' P1 `2 K9 f
I pretty sad that about the University official./ d$ ?4 ]. v) h7 V" 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) x' x6 A1 i9 Q5 w
& h8 Y' ^  m) p! @$ x9 L
[ 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:
8 J7 g5 H" Z1 F5 P" j3 y& x) 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 la- r+ \0 d5 ?1 r" E! B- q' u

! s* M3 B* }, p, d4 S# `2 }- Q+ n[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

% [* Y; `- ?' U8 G  J# n) L2 A1 m  q

: E& @4 X7 y4 L5 x7 d兩者有何分別?% I! a1 F5 d& y$ Q6 t  ]
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?