奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
8 ^2 m$ K: u0 t. j5 y7 R
. @( e8 C8 o/ [% u: W# K! f3 R1 hagree,; [3 l; Z& A8 E- \* R) r  W- j
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
3 B" L& _! e+ s$ G) i但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
  ~9 }8 D4 p; W/ m3 d8 R期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

- v+ v3 }8 {) ?& O1 ]8 }- y
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
$ u  F# w+ ?: ^) Q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
2 K$ h) m% y0 o* [3 k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 e* X6 \7 y3 uJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
' V$ q; }$ T# e  }0 Z( w! g0 n7 E有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
) m; z1 {9 z- M+ y
# W8 {' J6 q8 ^6 ], K' o係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
' o3 S" h, W/ J0 D" F
: o9 i1 B2 R7 v$ m為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

5 t2 y! L5 u5 \

2 K7 C4 i* [: c0 ]' r2 f7 C9 F絕對支持啦3 |9 ]- P! E1 E* p9 i
" Y* H1 G7 @5 T$ M" P5 C# o, ~
有錯就認,打就企定
1 i4 ]- O  q1 |
8 K6 f  F1 j8 I無錯當然要撐到底2 a# N$ O/ O$ K, N" y* X' e
. R$ d" y; l/ t7 Y
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩
2 p1 s2 X5 a$ e- S7 ?' k/ H$ R& c4 Y* I. @3 p( E3 ~% G5 ?4 i# i8 {( d
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
9 w$ Y+ Y6 }, H
: P. Z" K0 |, B8 H4 w& w" Q一份公眾讀物係好有影響力
- F3 J; J) e, C: `
- Z$ c( I, U) r# G我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
. }0 f9 A' Y* z% ~& {( G7 C: x, Q9 l) P  {! J' q8 m7 I
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?: w! c9 J$ o# r  S

+ D. v  T' V; d- [" U0 E( C我唔認為lor
3 S( e' q2 |6 g9 ?$ L
' |& y! t. h5 p唔係話要整死佢地% o2 e) I. f; K! n  ]* |3 n3 Z
  i2 u) h4 D& p' v0 Q0 M% B
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用1 S5 [$ ?& _# Q+ @0 a7 i- x
. u) Q& N7 ]+ L
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大4 k  f8 M& H' E$ t
) g8 z$ Y9 U3 A' b: C
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
+ W+ I2 V: Z, K& q$ t  g" A7 Z8 T; R, {1 P) U
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
6 L% a$ a/ x( Y# V* v  i) A. J+ H0 e+ o' f1 h
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
% M) v( Q- _( I' G9 v* O2 X4 f"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"# K7 O5 [  z5 H. X8 E/ Q' N1 Q
/ Q# q% u* ?- V9 V
我們的大學生
  \0 Z: X- p% y8 ~+ Y( M# G4 }( r8 ^  ]$ ~$ X$ g  p4 P

0 [( K! {9 I1 Z5 G
2 z! U* s' B7 Y- y3 W5 K
* t$ t% A: d; Z  N$ {

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:7 _& V) r+ s& g: o4 P0 W% _
) }% r+ y, R' \  t4 Z: q+ Y( K
; r7 j1 ]6 l4 Y7 }7 S1 @2 ^
有見地 !!!  Z: X. c$ b5 B
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' t3 N- x6 D! ]

% e6 }: a, S) f4 vI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. - ~9 Z* K! v1 `9 x  r
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind. ' d6 O+ T1 Q  ~( J
I pretty sad that about the University official.
) w1 r3 h  ?* G5 aIt'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
& F- _1 e! {* ?1 q% Z7 p6 o! e# C$ X) b
[ 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 Q; Q; L4 D; Z$ K  n: b6 Z
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
: j4 m- e% O5 D) x7 P& ^+ m, P3 v" y- |
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

/ O" A3 q% v  ]4 C- m0 a0 `

8 a# B$ r/ ~- o8 U& [/ s/ G3 d; H兩者有何分別?
0 k( Y" r* |4 `中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?