奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
! e/ G% }1 j( b% x( i, W9 O+ O& X2 m+ B
agree,( |/ d/ q/ i* j6 @+ _: V7 S
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,$ \0 a% f+ l7 w6 `# y$ Q; j, y$ }
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
& }9 G  A! z! p" N7 ~! u& [期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

1 Z2 v1 n" z- u+ L* I0 ]7 V1 v
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html5 K$ R' m- L1 g: s- {9 x) w; H
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 v: }& ]& b" `8 ~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.
+ ^4 c" T( ?; K, g0 }Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
& }- B/ ^  M0 C7 _' u+ R" h, M0 [有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！ ! T1 M: t* P( b% Y
; T" u, x2 v7 H" ]
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
$ O! O2 j4 R0 ]
0 x, q- _& {0 }2 O0 z9 ?* c2 q為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

8 k3 @& G. g4 T4 p% M# U8 J

0 e; g5 \% M( [" h( h! m& p* p" S絕對支持啦
4 X7 `( g5 [; D& ?& B' g7 Z& |5 B6 p- h. [. N1 M1 U* o; O
有錯就認,打就企定
; z0 a: n9 j2 D, a
/ }% P# {& \1 H' x& c9 c# D: n3 T無錯當然要撐到底
6 [: B. i, Y( j. O! \  e6 ?: U# M& q' ~# `! ^4 _* W# C4 r- m  ~
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩$ E( d2 Q/ s6 x" |# }+ A0 h/ K

0 w) w3 A% o4 }& Y" g9 ^* 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
# m1 N" Z/ L  Z. h, s- g: a1 C5 A6 v* q) @
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
0 j( |% n+ }/ p6 [! e  W- F; v; u& Q% r/ r- I8 M+ i
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生) K- W4 D& I7 j0 m/ |3 g6 m

3 L0 j: r; ?* R" ~唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
8 t$ N5 N3 c' z
: _& X7 ~) V+ e+ K/ g6 Q9 {我唔認為lor& s$ e) h1 b3 U# k4 B  J
# T$ E9 B: Y4 ^8 K  Z* r
唔係話要整死佢地
9 [# L& K0 P# h" X) V( r' c" ?% E( i; q
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用  w3 k0 \3 Y% W3 y1 v- w. K

$ S+ K& K7 K! n  O我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
' M, a3 }) Y6 s* I# o- g( _6 t1 ?: C: H8 h- v2 h3 u9 S
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
  L+ f3 e, B, M6 r" T
/ @# t. `9 ^% {唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
$ E- Y( m2 |7 t9 H; I1 M) m# _: t7 W: I/ A
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
% [" {7 l8 N2 w+ m"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
' @) }, E  r) C% O# a# S/ R& c/ a  ?
0 e  L7 C" o1 o: l8 m8 P我們的大學生
9 p( C; w* r: A5 F4 j
, x) l( r8 N5 O
; q; F% l; `: ~, _2 U4 L
, I8 h1 U0 v/ g" X8 H
) X1 {3 O/ ]6 V( x  C' H4 Y# n

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
7 \5 `% h3 e- f& j$ @. ]3 Q' t. V6 C4 R" S$ a+ [+ \# `
$ i3 k3 t+ s% j
有見地 !!!, w( {4 m6 o, o: T& k
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
5 ^# J2 M, s5 }) y# F( W4 X. V3 @) X% x' Q  h, I
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
7 W  i6 a( T, l1 i! ^0 HI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
4 Z* T7 R, `) B( CI pretty sad that about the University official.
, v# T* z& f, [4 BIt'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
/ l1 l1 l" M  p2 x4 ^
) x- g! E% E1 @* F0 t& t[ 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:
$ R: j( c' r! Q0 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 la6 O1 T1 S2 L# N4 P9 a7 M

( Q- _( A0 j$ \/ X( z  r4 W[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

1 p1 ~3 r3 p0 ^# p, p, y0 ~

# C! M$ `* W: R兩者有何分別?6 V+ Z8 Y) ]' \5 b& w
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?