奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:+ ]( \7 u8 c/ R' {, D" @; u
; @$ `* K& t5 k, [  D# Q
agree,# W7 N% b8 r/ f! `& N
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,0 O; v' Y  b# k$ _1 S  L" \
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,% b0 h( s3 i+ X7 _  s7 D. [
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

3 }; U+ m4 E' j  T2 n* I( Dhttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
- t. J' k  r- `- X2 f% W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 F6 X# \7 ?% ~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.* X+ a  ^( P4 {/ H, ?
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:; a( ^# Y: d. E  t
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
. k0 J, b$ Q8 t8 Q" `2 @( b1 y
  a4 Q7 B4 Q. g( W: A係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???1 u0 |! c' o  R) Z0 T' Y

+ C% c( m& ?# O& P! |為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

* y/ i% |0 [- _- j. B" v' [$ O

% J! y2 i$ G5 M5 y# H! Z絕對支持啦9 F6 w, S2 [# E) [

& e) C2 h0 ?# K# P% D# G有錯就認,打就企定3 N/ u9 _$ |- s, Y! i: O. y3 G/ h/ r. x

  p$ Q0 b* p; \無錯當然要撐到底# Y8 s* q+ j% h9 k
3 @3 D& L) J* k! k& G3 u% g
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩2 C8 J0 A* g2 @6 o% P, R* I# f

! O, G* Q: H5 @. e/ o- C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 m- _3 C3 f4 |# ]
$ G3 a! Z) b( F3 C7 }
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力1 K+ Q. C+ R7 y5 _
# ?9 D2 D: F1 y0 B
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生5 a6 |. F3 N5 d) X1 g7 {+ j6 l

4 t5 U2 k1 w  J8 C9 |唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
, t4 U3 N( T( ?- K$ B3 [8 A& X8 R& g7 g* B
我唔認為lor
9 M1 H% s. X5 `4 ?
) s$ W. w$ I; B0 j7 y唔係話要整死佢地/ M' l2 t. y  m5 o1 Q/ _7 }; b, G

1 ]2 Y9 n& H* |5 P+ A# z而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用: E& {' z. @8 s9 M: T! n2 p
9 ]" f/ c% }0 R
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大0 h$ b: S# ^1 R1 {, y

) |) I0 g6 n/ p7 L  f9 y* I有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
) o! M0 a: E/ ^7 [6 u! r
  l- D/ E3 [) j" v0 b3 e  h/ Y. N唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由* g. c; F# I; b: C  N

3 }5 Y3 @$ o3 c4 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- c! c/ G8 U' D& p5 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"
$ q5 c* G$ Y# L+ ?% ~0 A! m+ \1 D
. h. F3 `9 y% \# F  e. G2 m4 j我們的大學生
# E& X9 ^8 y8 Y) ?+ q' S' L: T, N3 x( A
! e) f6 z, ?4 i, K+ _
# b, J: z4 x/ \$ q! j1 X9 \; V0 R& G) e) P5 h
$ B. n& S' l. W/ T

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:
& S7 w, h% ?# g# r+ X
# `- r6 \0 n5 ~( c2 U* j% K! e/ i7 S8 n5 B& K6 d( i
有見地 !!!* N; X* a! }1 r! J
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.html1 J9 C( X9 u" z/ y
6 W4 f8 A/ P( C, u% q! K% R5 \1 ~( Z3 y
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. 8 O7 H! U/ K+ n3 k- ?; m
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
5 l2 I0 i& N9 x; v2 Y2 {I pretty sad that about the University official.$ t3 Z: \! _) G
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% m) Z; F' i- V. u: Z

$ |3 D3 ?7 k4 m5 W3 ?. p0 @[ 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:
4 o4 f2 g) e" _( Z1 X+ F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$ u4 r: ^) j' b' n+ z9 ?

2 I# ~" c. e$ W! g- t3 {' j[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

2 i) g; D$ R" j2 e9 [0 u, U3 q' q, c/ Q' b
兩者有何分別?; p1 S3 J8 i' m4 A7 }1 F; {% U
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?