奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
2 t: a* e) Q/ G4 D# |
- V9 m+ Y, M7 N% Hagree,
% e2 P! `( a9 M7 P( [& j我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主," X- C  ?1 V% B' d7 p5 w- A
但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,
" l4 `9 Z! z1 @期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

, v8 W1 D. N- i+ d2 shttp://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html
: f: U1 G0 Z* z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: [7 g8 F& ^( R* T, b
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.
: U1 X2 z' Y3 f% RJust some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:9 o+ t7 ]0 ]* l8 J2 x4 {" `
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
+ Q+ Z4 W8 O, s; x: G. f$ I
& s. f& l: A5 H9 _* h係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???: L5 J4 n2 {$ t& X' {3 d

* x+ K( A' ?' W- O, i% n3 a" x為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

% p1 y7 x4 U* g9 O9 \- x7 j9 X
! ]. o6 a# q! S9 B0 I& U. S' _' A. W
絕對支持啦
5 i' ^  d# U  S: x2 v3 n2 O0 Y% \3 z3 z; h/ K3 `  B1 s  @
有錯就認,打就企定! H& E* ], h3 B7 g2 b

! l! c! d( q' P0 D" k無錯當然要撐到底
6 L* s! e2 g& W% q: k9 z7 i9 H  C4 V$ \% D: F+ j
但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩$ [6 n" r" o4 A6 D- ~& J
4 p- P' x7 U6 O3 t( E# q
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
0 ^& I6 \) s: ^8 P3 H6 W* ~; ?2 j% T
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力* s. j% u: N6 m% i9 ]

8 e& Z5 Y5 o# Y我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生6 A6 R* m9 M' s( `) d
( [( F! Q6 u+ K8 ?5 f& R
唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?
8 [& d4 n7 X9 C( F/ s' n) K# y4 e5 H2 X! n
我唔認為lor( J% i* x' Q+ V0 q
' s7 d: h- b7 a  o
唔係話要整死佢地
9 U4 n& b( ~+ ^
4 W3 P/ S% C2 @# h* o! N6 m6 E而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
* u6 P% @8 G+ k) K1 W8 @$ j
; |! A" H) B9 K3 H9 j我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
2 o+ G6 N3 Q0 _, K1 K( O7 J) t' C( k( K/ _3 X0 ^, |
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
5 W! r2 F" R" ?, Z$ b9 t
8 I# K& w; `3 K/ y% Z唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由( P3 Z7 f# @1 n7 S

% M4 ]5 h" V$ `( S- Q% ~# g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/ \/ J  t( q/ x
"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"2 k' {8 y7 `( G( k/ {5 @
% F& T6 h, t( L, V5 }+ w
我們的大學生  F+ h% h8 K' N

& g1 x, M; d$ \
) m- L6 Q9 @0 f4 C; e- H2 X2 `9 _) u$ R( A7 @- E9 b9 K
  z6 _5 e' v6 t5 O! }& t

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:6 ]) ~/ l) e1 }* X) H

; T- D% b. Y  g/ r3 ]- g8 s
$ {" h: }5 ?+ ^6 O5 I有見地 !!!+ U6 h! J3 j; s! ]
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
  _* T: z1 u% `
: I& Q( K6 k9 A/ X+ u6 LI think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
4 e) j# v( J6 jI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
* g+ s( P6 ?/ A7 EI pretty sad that about the University official.
7 ~( d( ]# T2 `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
* q/ i- T! D! A- A9 a# H
3 @' w" ]4 Z/ ?8 ^5 X; a6 m3 _[ 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:
! u. O6 D, j# G9 \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 la1 H/ [. c. Q# z7 h

* N6 {, G  y) P  U6 z& G[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

* b+ M3 u3 ^* V) k
4 r8 f+ d. e( ^' S; f: c
兩者有何分別?
# P% ?( I; |9 Z% A$ C/ @中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?