奪命老妖

Originally posted by seafireson2 at 2007-5-15 02:29 PM:
' m. H6 t5 E6 V5 M
% _5 L0 l7 B. @% t4 d; F0 magree,
2 V$ w" k. c" Y* z8 M我都未睇過,根本唔知係點,可能真係討論成份為主,
) Y& V. f* T6 ]6 i6 T$ [2 D但我估同方向生果比,係小兒科,) o- m. S+ _. \" g1 e) A8 N
期盼方向生果比人被定性二級不雅!

6 [3 M! X; }5 P- y
http://www.xanga.com/cusp_07/590 ... 76362152636620.html& [* q# w+ u3 h; o1 C
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
! T& x) ~, g8 h6 {0 v3 Z" p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 v# }- L! q! l* u" X/ ]9 x
Just some extreme-conservative people too nervous about it.

sakura310

Originally posted by d228216 at 2007-5-15 01:58 PM:" ^# u; I! d: ^3 U( a
有罪就要罸, 冇罪就要平反, 法庭應申張正義！
3 p: S) y9 m* e: j8 O/ ^
$ K0 s% v& {! h6 }: S' p係咪大學生根本冇關係....大學生巴閉d?? 有免死金牌???
+ L/ e5 J) n+ q4 k3 c- }* q
; m/ I5 w$ }0 p- m為自己既行為負責, 係今日既年青人最需要學習既野!

/ ?: y! N: i$ y6 R" ?6 n' b' L
( z) h  j# x. \7 g7 x) K) w7 X絕對支持啦; M8 \+ ]4 b, z

) H4 j1 s; n$ ~; k0 W- |有錯就認,打就企定
; }9 Q# g& w5 H# W# e- r# C6 o5 l+ s+ H- i) N: S' ~
無錯當然要撐到底
/ p/ m! \, A$ e) j* I" A+ E
$ }. ~" T9 w6 d4 E: I4 |, y但今次我覺得係班大學生唔0岩% G- Y0 \9 Z# Y- C

6 d( D* W; f/ P8 m) }0 l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7 k% B3 W6 E, F, U
" n* D- F/ t& v0 v4 Y. k
一份公眾讀物係好有影響力( N" M' Q' ]7 _* A
/ ~- @$ v4 T7 H
我唔認為學校方今次要幫班學生
) i- K! I+ K( |% j
8 U2 [! }5 ?0 L唔通第時出到去做野做錯事就有亞head幫你頂?3 q- s* N' F4 Z; |& x' D* g

6 j9 D8 B4 P. R3 u我唔認為lor3 t4 G) m5 K1 b+ ?

  V, ^& z2 g' B0 G) n唔係話要整死佢地% m5 r' L. a$ U. `

& P% m, R$ N: U3 y$ n* [5 Y而係今次件事,如果判得成的話,自然起到警惕作用
! }6 A. R$ f% T9 J9 ]; c7 A' k" _. [, ~
我覺得係d人將言論自由ge範圍放得太大
# m9 f4 x( A, D, m7 f0 [6 z: {% s- g
有d野係應該講,有d野係唔應該係公眾場合講的
2 }9 S6 @$ L& a& G# }
% i' o7 {. ~2 E) M4 W3 L5 V唔係話唔應該講就係防礙言論自由
# D1 W3 @9 K8 U+ h6 a$ @! j9 d8 r; z
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
) I9 j3 E: b6 ~& z"佢地有比一般市民較高o既學歷,就更應該能夠明辨是非"
6 B0 g% k' t2 q4 `0 r' }
- e1 |# h2 x) B; @6 X. t* M我們的大學生' g2 o, D' D. ^! L# T) @# R
' ]# c- {9 \  g2 h2 y

! j7 g, L' a- k; O7 N$ E
: `3 ^* X# m6 g  Z  I7 E* Z; m
6 W0 z- r! K! y3 W! n3 o- B

Originally posted by easy_man at 2007-5-15 02:13 PM:  k- P! J+ ^( I' c& ^: N- E
2 w  N& t1 E# V# W6 r# w
  o& M7 l- X# ~& ~
有見地 !!!; |  s5 z& C8 ^8 k4 P* u
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.html6 ?+ A+ M- N9 O& J/ k
1 ^5 P" b/ `" N1 `/ Q
I think the content is rather premature, i.e. not a porn stuff compare with some HK newspapers.
% ?  W. D% v: L1 \0 nI never think of any porn or sexual stuff after the reading, but just have some moment to retreat the social life in mind.
5 z  o; x4 x% _" h! DI pretty sad that about the University official.
/ n* W% f2 X, ?$ N6 jIt'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
3 b) W" Z- I% E7 F# n7 E2 F: A! O" v3 d
[ 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:
* [& \1 ?3 Z; Q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
& t" l8 }: C2 p+ D  T8 L! F$ f0 }' t, F5 c
[ Last edited by bigfish on 2007-5-15 at 05:26 PM ]

3 _  y/ g' n6 Z. @

) j5 B( K7 g8 t兩者有何分別?
3 W% E. _8 h* L. ]. a( l中文就市井,英文就華麗,有咩根據?