奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:( D& v4 n5 c2 _
; ]3 L, I) [9 x/ s
agree,
, G: C% L1 _5 r0 }0 k我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主," E4 |# {, d  C; W: _3 H: I% Y* i5 J
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,$ B4 u$ m0 d- c8 K' A. P
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

7 }+ Y7 Q3 q, }- chttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html: e! [  O+ B& x/ W( c( K" Y  K. f
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: |; _6 `8 g- z0 h2 a2 ]' p" f
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 ^( M' W4 c! A( {/ d% H9 jJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
" v" J% ^) w  F$ |/ ]有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ 4 w0 ]) o0 |6 H& U

: y' n/ u/ i9 k0 e2 v4 B& I係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???. @4 ?8 m6 U% ?9 x

) ^2 p7 ~. q" E0 T為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

" J9 D4 @: w4 M$ c; F$ G3 B$ d4 a

* d- y7 k# i( L4 h( g/ y絕對支持啦
9 R0 ]$ G0 @6 @, F' u/ V9 M. G9 M* @0 r# ~/ d& v1 D6 y+ L; O
有錯就認,打就企定+ G' v9 y/ q4 ^) L

) [, T& `$ j- k; e無錯當然要撐到底! v0 o. @  m3 O; L/ C4 q; q" Q
- `9 {( @/ C7 L" ]
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
. A* _! z9 o' }+ Y! F" h1 }# d& [$ O, G& E/ L- ]4 G; W, R
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
2 v' s1 r( T2 }6 Q# i
* R0 {7 I& ?! X, ~; W( j! x$ Z$ M一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
( {/ R$ j, }: V7 w. f& A- @9 h* e' h* J0 H
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生# m  g3 V! M8 T" r3 @& L3 z# s' i

$ d, A8 }& t% J) n- b& S8 e唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?9 u4 T, J' f8 }
# l* F! }. I" z0 u, q$ c4 L7 ~
我唔認為lor
' V7 ~' t0 |& O. U9 L) M  k5 p7 g9 x/ n5 n0 K% ?
唔係話要整死佢地
7 k. N7 C+ V0 J) a7 I
0 V- o/ u" f) }而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
4 g4 S8 w! C* ]# Q# C- u+ z* m, v! m/ P: f2 y8 V
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大9 `0 X& r5 _" L0 ~# X
' M# i4 K! Z) C1 f& Q# m7 J
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的- Q+ K  m1 I& l& C' j

/ k5 A4 [% Q- ?4 {3 p唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由7 G+ @( j2 v! I  u# L
% B, l: G* R2 S& l5 B' S3 E# o0 Z3 c
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
3 l+ w; ~2 H5 _# X8 w, F9 O' _% 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"$ k  O; E' ]* b$ T$ A1 K1 |

- ]+ y; F( K' a. Q7 O4 Q! u2 \) P5 }' Q5 {我們的大學生% m8 O; a% Y. S+ @; T7 _& E

2 K7 c+ a# k) {
* k* }5 y. M. I0 u/ f* {* C! [
- T: h  T" z6 p% E9 r
/ i4 I" W! r: I  _) k

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:, M& {% C9 N% ]
  ?- s; S5 u3 b7 O

# f4 {9 r9 Z) b2 h; [4 J/ T& `有見地 !!!
. Z+ T! q& \( A9 C- _4 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.html
$ b+ A" B7 q; K5 R8 l" @9 Y
4 |) O8 {, p9 K% n6 GI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. - L9 \  n* s  B3 ^
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. 0 l: g' o3 |3 c1 o4 b
I pretty sad that about the University official.
8 s% J- f9 u# XIt'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- G" ?# @3 a7 ^9 g+ Q6 r# V
2 y, `5 U! g: v4 J' `
[ 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 ?+ w4 z( @% o* V* c  S$ A
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+ E" L3 w4 ]6 {# n1 \/ `+ \( o: p0 A! w2 g0 B
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

& W5 o+ M$ c* i$ a2 i+ L1 G- `5 S" I( v9 W
兩者有何分別?+ L2 q8 Q3 J. s& U
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?