奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:! B' D0 E" a# `
  [1 t' p+ R9 R! S
agree,$ G. O$ x5 x! R; p
我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
) ^* z  s: u6 P/ J1 n8 }2 d但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,* o! Z' U9 b" n7 V6 R
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

" q$ F# E3 _' N4 n
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
# T4 |4 x: t  |5 e: b) @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* b8 [' b# u, C4 I
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.
$ W; y. ~) `5 Z4 ]  bJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:
/ F3 {( I! ]# w1 N4 N- ~有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
6 `4 S3 T3 Z" i' c! c! f6 v; G3 D6 Q5 M& R5 x
係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
$ W3 P' @# M& H" A
! O9 m( y" I/ p3 H8 ?8 T為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

8 C2 I7 |  z& C! ]) u
$ q3 \# h6 ~( {2 E* k" e& \- @; J: x* T絕對支持啦
* t7 W: k: M* E( w, H9 Z6 R0 z3 C/ u2 z- l$ w
有錯就認,打就企定
1 c  S. |. w+ u* {5 z0 z3 s" H! A- R: ?% j7 t$ z( _1 J9 ~8 P- w
無錯當然要撐到底/ W$ z  w* k3 e+ Z4 W7 c
# z3 L$ m0 F  m# l
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩7 T& w6 `. I: v$ A
# u: Z! L2 k" W/ H
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% {" d/ S& h& c) W' q, v
* Q/ L" Z% c: e9 y2 H8 R" m
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力) u1 o/ H5 ^4 R6 \& X
3 g( ?" K5 A+ Y
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生: I- p# `# ^1 z7 O/ x: p
! h/ i( L) L' O6 I. ~  G
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
; T5 v9 U. u) U  P
! g; y" W7 Z2 M  w) |我唔認為lor
; M& E9 H& ?# J# N; r# Q0 @% U2 r; d* m; w
唔係話要整死佢地. J  @# a( q( P
5 F# c6 L5 M7 `) U2 Q7 W
而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用6 R  H( e! k' {4 O* b: p! |
5 x4 Y# P7 `! n! c2 n5 a
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大4 M% j( `5 ^5 q

' Y5 y' v2 M( f1 L& ~# [有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
* K! C8 b: I3 ^! t# \& X: V# v! Y; z4 k
唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
$ W% {; _/ Y  L  |
! r( `) E4 P$ A( Y1 c2 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% {$ W) P# g3 ~* y  T- d# e' ~" |! O
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
# g3 f( J4 c( @6 t
! S8 b; c. [. u$ m" p9 T我們的大學生
, n1 ]1 i( B& b( P# C
( }7 {  P0 g% e, j! X0 r3 S4 `1 N0 x
- U0 a, z, W+ M& M8 ^% }( |/ O
4 H) L* ]! x' W5 P3 V3 r7 E9 }7 ^7 ^" Z( o6 q8 I- p

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:2 C) ?& H- J1 {9 q9 Q$ `

* W; ?$ g& G- A) v" f, f' B- b1 y. q7 a  N
有見地 !!!
; _1 U/ e0 S3 w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; ?+ o# s! S7 L; m8 q" S

8 d# ?' a/ r  e/ VI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers. ) p2 p; f$ L8 S9 z5 ?# ^0 K: k+ R6 {6 a
I never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
  C7 P' w6 }* D% V' r: |: pI pretty sad that about the University official.
. n5 _0 Z/ u$ ]9 F7 zIt'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
6 N/ V' b# E* \0 v* P- S: u0 r2 T& s7 L# e! u
[ 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:' q. A: O$ D; H! u
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
6 f1 C" u' |0 [+ C% N& u' p  @# j) u, H6 N, l  U# D
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

' N# y4 \  V$ U0 \- g! g; i

. j( n3 R) G6 s+ B兩者有何分別?; n( a" z# x$ P% O
中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?