溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: Bill C-389的啟示 [打印本頁]

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-19 15:30 標題: Bill C-389的啟示

又收到大選email, 一定要與大家分享吓.

反對黨, 在想甚麼, 在做甚麼??

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HouseChamberBusiness/ChamberVoteDetail.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&Vote=165&GroupBy=party&FltrParl=40&FltrSes=3

Bill C-389法案把 ‘性別認同’ 及 ‘性別表達’ 加入在 ‘加拿大人權法案’ 內.

即是你需要認同他人的性別，無論這個人生理上是男或是女，他／她認為自己是那一性別，你就需要認同。同時，他／她外表及行為，無論是何種性別衣着表現出來，你都需要接受。

舉個例子：　一生理上是男子，自稱為一個（女性），大家就必需認同，（她）入女廁，（她）入女更衣室，就算（她）是男性特徵的身體，你都要認同（她）自稱的（女性）性別。

另一例子：一個女子，以全身男裝打扮，以表達其自選性別，要參加男子高球賽，你就要接受。

NDP新民主黨的Burnaby-Douglas選區Bill Siksay 提出這項荒謬的議案。

保守黨極力阻止這法案的通過，但由於是小數政府，只能有135票反對。

新民主黨、自由黨及魁人政團聯合以143票通過這法案。

這法案把今天的社會規則弄得一榻糊塗，我們還需要分男女廁嗎？我們比賽還需要分男子組、女子組嗎？你如何知道這個法案沒有被濫用？你放心讓你的妻子女兒用公共泳池更衣室嗎？日後，一個男子着女裝比基尼入女更衣室脫光身更衣，你都只好接受，你的眼光、言語及反應都有可能構成歧視。

自由黨已一步步把毒品，婚姻的定義糢糊化，今次是性別糢糊化，下一次又會是甚麼？你真的能接受自由黨把我個的社會規矩一一破壞嗎？真的任何事都可（自由化）嗎？自由黨在方面有什麼隱藏議題？Ignatieff 及 Layton的腦袋是如何界定對錯、規矩及道德呢？

今天，這個已三讀通過的C-389法案因為解散國會而停下來，但反對黨的胡作非為，這類型的法案很容易就會死灰復燃。

避免新民主黨及自由黨進一步破壞我們的個人權利及傳統價值，

請支持一個大多數保守黨政府。

作者: zoids 時間: 2011-4-19 17:10

All extreme premises that rarely happens. Your intention is so obvious and your example is totally laughable. Why you are rooting for a Nazi racist party in the first place?

Conservatives are the Tea Party of Canada which mis-inform and mislead the public for years. Harper has to go! From Wiki:

Simon Houpt of the Globe and Mail point out the similarities between Conservative party marketing in Canada and the marketing of the Tea Party in the US. Others argue that the current incarnation of conservatism espouses pro-American views, attempting to create a far-right media presence in Canada (popularly termed "Fox news North") and limit the dissemination of scientific information.[1]
[youtube]qItqs4HO6hc[/youtube]

作者: Prelude 時間: 2011-4-19 17:28

All extreme premises that rarely happens. Your intention is so obvious and your example is totally ...
zoids 發表於 2011-4-19 17:10

Don't know what are you trying to say.

作者: 閒人一個 時間: 2011-4-19 19:23

All extreme premises that rarely happens. Your intention is so obvious and your example is totally ...
zoids 發表於 2011-4-19 17:10

什麼時候, 討論變成無理的抺黑, 扣帽子??! Nazi racist你都講得出, up得就up!

作者: zoids 時間: 2011-4-19 19:38

什麼時候, 討論變成無理的抺黑, 扣帽子??! Nazi racist你都講得出, up得就up! ...
閒人一個發表於 2011-4-19 19:23

You must be new to Canada.

http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com ... 11/04/19/03610.html

作者: zoids 時間: 2011-4-19 19:44

and for a not so serious source for the funneh:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Stephen%20Harper

作者: zoids 時間: 2011-4-19 19:53

Stop Conservatives = stop racism

http://www.stopracism.ca/

作者: Prelude 時間: 2011-4-20 01:40

Stop Conservatives = stop racism
zoids 發表於 2011-4-19 19:53

This is non sense.
You are like FLG. If you want to live, join FLG?
I wonder if any LYK buy this kind of crap, Stop conservatives = stop racism? wtf

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-20 02:03

Conservatives  is originated from racism parties and wasn't welcome immigrants until recently because of the vote.  Even if you look at the immigration policy, there is a fxxking obvious favorite on European immigrants than Asian.

U can proof me wrong or not, but I, personally, think that the current conservatives party will go damn so evil if they get power.
Why they want majority so badly?  Canada can run even with minority.  Why Conservatives keep trying to push some unfavorite bill and budget to force oppositions to call for election? If they do the right thing, they will earn and deserve a majority.  I don't see it.
And I don't see anything that conservatives have done to improve our personal right and respect citizens in the democracy society.

For economy, they didn't do anything actually.  it is our financial traditions of our banks that save us from crisis, not them.

anyway, I hope conservative will not get all the power.  Even if they do, I hope they won't go too evil.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-20 09:09

回復 9# rainbow-davie

"Even if you look at the immigration policy, there is a fxxking obvious favorite on European immigrants than Asian. "
你有數據支持嗎?

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-20 09:17

Bill C-389 is the reason I would vote against Liberal.
I voted Liberals for 20 years even when John Turner was the PM.
But now they are so desperate and insane just hungry for power.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-20 09:30

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-20 09:34 編輯

回復 9# rainbow-davie

好, 我就proof you wrong

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/statistics/facts2009/permanent/08.asp

Family class 各地區就每年移民人數中的比例
_

Source area	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Africa and the Middle East	11.6	11.7	10.3	11.5	12.7	12.0	11.8	13.5	14.2	14.9
Asia and Pacific	53.7	52.8	58.8	59.4	54.7	57.7	61.0	56.7	52.8	52.8
South and Central America	14.4	15.0	12.6	11.3	12.0	11.3	10.0	11.1	11.8	11.9
United States	5.2	5.4	4.5	4.6	6.0	6.5	6.3	6.0	7.1	6.8
Europe and the United Kingdom	15.0	15.1	13.9	13.2	14.6	12.4	10.8	12.6	14.1	13.6
Source area not stated	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0

自由黨在2000-2005 保守黨在2006-2009

太平洲及亞洲 52.8% -- 59.4% 52.8% -- 61.0%

歐洲 13.2% -- 15.1% 10.8% -- 14.1%

_
請你自己看看, 在移民來源地的比例上, 保守黨真的比自由黨有很大分別嗎? 保守黨把歐洲移民加多了多少? lol, 還好數字可說明一切.

實際你有沒有發現移民來源地一向都不平衡地偏重亞洲太平洋區, 你又不提出favorite on Asian immigrants than European. LOLOLOL

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-20 09:40

回復 10# satil

Did you hear the news last week?

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-20 09:44

回復 13# rainbow-davie

無意義的問題

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-20 10:00

For those who don't know anything about conservatives, please look at what is "Right Wing" in Canadian politics, and where conservatives come from. and what members they have, and what did they say.

In brief, they are from Reform & Progressive conservatives, which both had history of saying racism thing, and against non-white immigrants. Well. may be you are new. or you live here long enough that you are not considered yourself immigrants. But this is what they are. period.

You pick your choice. and your choice need to your future.

作者: Guy 時間: 2011-4-20 15:54

There are two kinds of person who are screwing up this world: religious leaders and politicians.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-20 16:40

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-20 16:41 編輯

回復 16# Guy

這兩類人都不是問題所在, 最大問題是有一班不看事實證據, 不尋找數字論據, 只懂道聽途說, 盲目迷信, 自欺欺人的死硬派追隨者.

作者: BiscottiGelato 時間: 2011-4-20 17:29

Conservatives is originated from racism parties and wasn't welcome immigrants until recently becaus ...
rainbow-davie 發表於 2011-4-20 02:03

LOL. Minority works? How much more tax do you want to pay for running these elections? LOL.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-20 19:17

有人宣傳話保守黨唔好，有幾‘唔好’呢？
這是自由黨明知不能成為執政黨時的計策。
他們提出用小數政府來制衡吓。你們中計了。
過去數年NDP與Liberal聯手互相支持對方的議案，
結果，三個小數反對黨聯手，挾持政府，通過荒謬、不理後果、自私的法案。
結果，三個小數反對黨聯手，為反對而反對，否決或拖延保守黨政府提出的良好法案。
這就是大家相信應有的好結果？這會是比保守黨大多數全權掌政更好？
現時國會的政策，法案及方向是（真的）為保守黨的原意嗎？
大部分的法案都是NDP, Liberal及Bloc互相為私心而出的，C-389就是最好的例子。
為何每次有可以另政府倒台的法案（如預算案），即有一反對黨用諸多理由支持通過，因為，這才可以繼續保持現在挾持狀態，繼續胡作非為。
經過數年，請大家睜開你的眼睛，看清是誰掌控今天的政府（如你所說）而做成今天的‘唔好’。過去數年政府基本是由NDP及Liberal加分離主義的Bloc幕後把持。請看看國會的會議記錄或投票結果。
http://howdtheyvote.ca
現在自由黨及新民主黨用‘保守黨’講大話為藉口推翻政府，因為他們認為是他們最有利的時機。其實，保守黨提出，監獄、戰機等問題只是在撥款法案討論階段，若保守黨不提供足夠資料，又或反對黨不認同資料，反對黨只需投反對票阻止撥款便可，這才是反對黨的責任。當大眾國民都不同意再作大選時，反對黨強行以誤導選民的藉口推翻政府，是誰更有‘唔好’。

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-20 22:01

回復 2# zoids

"All extreme premises that rarely happens. "

LOL! 極端? 罕有?!?!
美國緬州(Maine)於2005年通過類似法例. 在2009年有一名男生認為自己是女性, 要求入女厠, 其他男學生見好玩, 可以入女厠, 亦爭相效法, 為平息混亂和保護女生免受騷擾,校方特淮許該男生使用教師兩性共用的洗手間, 但不為學生家人接納, 並指控學校歧視. 最終人權委員會裁決[拒絕該名男生使用女厠為不合理], 並說明, [體育隊伍--分開性別作賽的體育項目, 必須容許(轉換心理性)學生根據自己認為或表明的心理性別參加比賽].
是誰沒有想清楚法案帶來的後果, 還是有組織或人仕, 有意隱藏某義題或某傾向.

作者: 閒人一個 時間: 2011-4-21 09:37

回復 12# satil

thx, it clean up my mind.

作者: 閒人一個 時間: 2011-4-21 09:45

有啲人唔知係咁心理有問題, 還是無帶個腦去開會, 咁既法案都支持.
比自由黨執政咪另全國人民男女不分, 我這分鐘鍾意做女人, 下一分鐘鍾意做男人, 咁會唔如同時影響其他法例?
例如, 有冇(女人)強姦女人?

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-21 09:47

Again, I used to vote Liberals,
but what have they done to Canadian since Martin took office?
The heavy weight Lib refused to run, and we stuck with Dion
and Ignatiff, all they do would be objection with nothing to back up their words.
If they want my vote, fine, but they have to earn it.
As the radio commentator put it, he already prepared for big lost,
"I will consider forming a government if the Governor General asks me
after a conservative victory" what he is telling us? He asked for the
election and he gets what he deserves. He is going to be under NDP's
shadow, or BQ, one way or the other. The fall of a Canadian empire.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-23 13:11

me 2! I used to vote for Liberals.

但過往一兩屆大選, 看到太多Liberal的問題, 0的自由黨友又盲目支持, 看不到自由黨的錯與壞, 只懂找其他黨的缺點來支持自己的迷信. 真正為自己的支持的政黨好, 就好應該同時對自己支持的政黨所作的錯與壞提出指責, 從而改進. 不應是養奸.

現實一點, 日常生活, 獨裁/民主, 一個小家庭早就深深體會, 沒有真的全民主, 最終都是某程度的獨裁才能成事. 最重要是獨裁者的能力及本事. 及向那一方面獨裁.

我是做生意的, 我不會接受分享話事權, 因為永遠爭論無休, 冇51%以上我不做. 甘心做小股東就不要多事多幹, 意見當然要提出, 最終由大股東決定盡情發揮.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-24 22:10

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-24 22:24 編輯

Point out Dosanjh lied to Chinese Immigrants - The Chinese community will not tolerate this!!!!

Have someone pointed out the Ujjal lied in the Fairchild Radio debate. Anthony Lui asked the candidates, Wai, Ujjal & Meena on the issue of Bill C-389. The question was phrased like this, "This Bill C-389 introduced by NDP MP Bill Siksay allowed men feeling they are women to use the women washroom. If this bill is introduced again, would you support it?

Wai said no. Meena said she supports human rights and equality. Dosanjh lied and said every MP in the parliament voted unanimously for this bill. He voted for this bill. That is for sure.

This bill passed the House of Commons in the third reading with 143 to 135. All but 7 Liberals voted for the bill. All NDPs voted for the bill. All but 4 Quebecois voted for the bill. All but 6 Conservatives voted against the bill. 2 Independent both voted against the bill. The bill died in the Senate because of the election.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HouseChamberBusiness/ChamberVoteDetail.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&Vote=165&GroupBy=party&FltrParl=40&FltrSes=3

Dosanjh displayed comtempt to Chinese immigrants by treating us as fools and being ignorant! Sadly, Host Fenella didn't bother to correct him. That is totally unacceptable. Someone should sharply point it out and make an uproar. Tell him that Chinese immigrants are not ignorant and we are not fools! We cannot tolerate liars in Ottawa or in any eletion debates!

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-25 07:25

本帖最後由 sheep 於 2011-4-25 07:28 編輯

Point out Dosanjh lied to Chinese Immigrants - The Chinese community will not tolerate this!!!!

Hav ...
satil 發表於 2011-4-24 22:10

律師講野就係咁喇
係事實
不過唔係事實嘅全部

如果個個中國人都好似你咁精靈
啲牛鬼蛇神重有地企？
既然你咁講
我就同佢兜啦
佢開宗明義話係"NDP嘅苗錫誠"提出來嘅
響國會係一致通過 "（淨係NDP）"
（淨係NDP）唔講埋啫
到你'揸撚住'我嘅時候
（淨係NDP）嗰句係唔記得講埋啫

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-25 07:31

全句應該係
嚮國會只有NDP嘅議員係一至通過呢條法案嘅啫

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-25 07:34

Sadly, Host Fenella didn't bother to correct him.
satil 發表於 2011-4-24 22:10

佢淨係識搵定啲問題
唔識因應回答去追問

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-25 08:17

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-25 08:27 編輯

指責杜新志騙中國移民 -華人社群將不會容忍的！！

有人指出，杜新志在加拿大中文電台的辯論中說謊。Anthony Lui問候選人，楊蕭慧儀Wai（保守黨），杜新志Ujjal（自由黨）及王璐Meena（新民主黨）關於C- 389法案。問題是這樣的措辭，“這項C -389法案的由新民主黨國會議員Bill Siksay引入草案，允許男人感覺自己是女性便可使用婦女的洗手間。這項法案若再次提出，你會支持嗎？”

楊蕭慧儀Wai說“不會”。王璐Meena說，“支持人權和平等”。杜新志Ujjal撒謊說“每一個國會議員在議會內一致投票通過了這一法案。他投票支持這一法案。這是肯定的。”

這項法案在下議院三讀143比135通過。所有自由黨議員都〔贊成〕該法案（除7人外）。所有NDP議員的投票〔贊成〕該法案。魁北克人政團所有〔贊成〕該法案（除4人外）。保守黨議員全部〔反對〕該法案（除6人外）。 2位獨立議員都〔反對〕該法案。因選舉，該法案並未提交參議院。

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HouseChamberBusiness/ChamberVoteDetail.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=3&Vote=165&GroupBy=party&FltrParl=40&FltrSes=3

杜新志Ujjal顯示出他鄙視華人移民，認為我們是傻瓜，無知！可悲的是，主持人辛智芬 Fenella沒有即時去糾正他，這是完全不能接受的。應該有人尖銳指出，告訴他，中國移民不是無知，我們不是傻瓜！我們不能容忍騙子在渥太華或任何選舉辯論！

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-25 08:41

本帖最後由 somewhereintime 於 2011-4-25 08:44 編輯

I will , as a citizen, advocate to ban this bill forever.
I will not vote for any candidate supporting or remaining neutral on this bill, period

作者: blue20ae 時間: 2011-4-25 09:44

sigh...杜新志本身係NDP. 為咗要做MP轉咗去Liberal. 證明佢無原則.

不過目前Liberal同NDP一樣,都係行 far left.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-25 11:30

Make sure to reserve the time slot to vote on the election day. I already casted my vote last Friday.

作者: AnitaMok 時間: 2011-4-26 08:40

I will , as a citizen, advocate to ban this bill forever.
I will not vote for any candidate suppor ...
somewhereintime 發表於 2011-4-25 08:41

Totally AGREE !!!

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-26 11:24

I have no prejudice against any political party, but I cannot accept this bill
or whoever endorses it

作者: AnitaMok 時間: 2011-4-29 11:50

c/p

If you are concerned not only about economic, tax, health care and other social services but also about where different political parties stand on moral issues; then please read on for your reference. Below are voting records on three important legislations indicating how different political parties represented the 36 ridings in British Columbia in the past.

If you find this e-mail useful, please forward it to your friends.

With vigilance, please cast your ballot on May 2.

Information is sourced from the Parliament of Canada web site: http://www.parl.gc.ca

Bill C-38 Legalization of Same Sex Marriage
This bill was tabled by the then Liberal Government and passed at the Third Reading in the House of Commons on June 28, 2005.
Conservatives in 22 ridings: 1 Absent, 1 voted For, 20 voted Against
Liberals in 8 ridings: ALL voted For
NDP in 5 ridings: ALL voted For
Independent in 1 riding: Absent

Bill C-313 Raise the Age of Consent for Sex from 14 to 16 for More Protection for Children
This bill was sponsored by a Conservative MP but defeated at the Second Reading under the then Liberal Government on September 28, 2005.
Conservatives in 22 ridings: 5 Absent, 17 voted For
Liberals in 8 ridings: 2 Absent, 6 voted Against
NDP in 5 ridings: 2 voted For, 3 voted Against
Independent in 1 riding: Absent

Bill C-389 An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code (gender identity and gender expression), dubbed as the "Bathroom Bill", would potentially allow men who say they are women to use women’s washrooms and vice versa, increasing public safety risk in public facilities.
This bill was sponsored by NDP MP Bill Siksay representing Burnaby—Douglas; and it was passed at the Third Reading in the House of Commons on February 9, 2011.
Conservatives in 21 ridings: 1 voted For, 20 voted Against
Liberals in 5 ridings: ALL voted For
NDP in 9 ridings: ALL voted For
1 Vacant Seat

作者: zoids 時間: 2011-4-29 14:22

Only uncivilized/Christianmaniac people discriminate gay ppl, look at Europe and other developed country.

What a bunch of BS... all of you should have gone to Texas and other Southern US areas instead.

OP and others obviously are Conservatives paid election campaigners with all the skewed emails/contents at hands.

Just look at this example from previous post:

Conservatives in 22 ridings: 1 Absent, 1 voted For, 20 voted Against
Liberals in 8 ridings: ALL voted For
NDP in 5 ridings: ALL voted For

They don't highlight 20 Conservatives vote against...but say ALL Liberals and NDP... obviously you did it with own political agenda.

Just another proof why I should have stopped bother pointing out your biased post if not I don't want people only see your messed up side of the facts.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 15:25

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-29 15:39 編輯

wow, 誤導, c-389與discriminate gay有什麼關係.

第一句就扣帽子, 先把你定性做 '歧視', 咁老共!!

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-29 17:22

c-389
如果佢係以經做咗變性手術嘅話
完全冇問題
佢係同性戀嘅
亦都冇所謂
問題係
佢未做變性手術
但係話自己係另外嗰個性別
你另其他人有誤會恐慌
你的人權要得到彰顯
其他人就要無咗表達嘅權利？
你有冇搞錯
係你自己嘅問題
唔好賴人哋

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-29 18:31

我係GAY, 我有好多朋友都係, 或唔係但開明, 呢個世界唔係得異性戀. 呢個係現實.

而我, 打死唔會投保守黨.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 19:44

你係基，冇問題，我都有好多朋友是gay或les的，你有你的權利去基，我十分認同你的選擇。你可以要求政府立例，加設男基（女方），男基（男方），女基（男方），女基（女方）的廁所，更衣室等地方。又要所有團體以後開設多４個組別給你們參加，以往男子組、女子組，現今加多男基女組、男基男組、女基男組、女基女組囉。你強行要求認同時男時女去入侵其他類別的空間，就是侵佔他／她人的權利。如果你要時男時女，自我認為性別成立的話，我是否可以同樣要求時老時幼，去參加有年齡限制的比賽？現今的任何分組活動、比賽，是否都應同時最消，是否都是某方面的歧視？你既然在一向清楚分界的男女兩界中，加添多個不同類別，你好應同時保留清楚分界的原則。

你想人尊重你，你要回你的權利，你可以爭取建立你的空間，爭取你的權利，但，首先你不要影響人的原有權利，你無權取走他人的權利。你奪取他人的權利而滿足自己的私心，我打死都唔會尊重你。

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 20:06

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-29 20:13 編輯

當毒品，婚姻一步步模糊化後，當性別都可以模糊化，下一步不如年齡模糊化，自認心境年齡是否又應認同，否則又是歧視？咁五十歲認為是十五歲是否又可同十四歲的小童性交，是否又不構成孌童。再進一步，人獸界線又可否模糊化，大家都是動物類，是否界線又可自定，人獸交的法例好應該取消了。自由黨凡事想自由化，而我，打死都唔會投自由黨。

講開講，真係未見過鍾意食屎飲尿班人出來要政府保障他們，要求所有食店提供屎尿餐。

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-29 21:22

真係未見過鍾意食屎飲尿班人出來要政府保障他們，要求所有食店提供屎尿餐
satil 發表於 2011-4-29 20:06

我就盡在不言中
有人就無言以對

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-29 21:30

我又好想啲女基（做仔嗰個）去沙灘
淨係著條泳褲
露出嗰36D
大聲講
望咩呀望未見過咁健碩嘅男人呀？

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-29 21:50

忽然我又諗起
每年同性戀自豪日 Pride Parade
點解我要自豪？
我感到自豪係因為我與普通人平常人唔同
既然我係比普通人平常人優勝啲
點解我又要佢好似普通人平常人咁去看待我呢？

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-29 23:01

你係基，冇問題，我都有好多朋友是gay或les的，你有你的權利去基，我十分認同你的選擇。你可以要求政府立例 ...
satil 發表於 2011-4-29 19:44

你先用你既言論同你D 朋友當面講. 唔好人前好開明,背後陰陰濕濕.

我本人無咩, 呢度識我既知我係咩人. SATIL, 你慳D啦.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 23:50

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-29 23:53 編輯

又扣人帽子！　你又如何知我冇講呢．　唉！

真係只有冇料的人才向人攻擊，從不向事分析．．　
有料就列points, 舉例子．．．　你真可憐可卑　

呀！　講多句，　我大把，　從來唔使慳d．
但要多謝你，　冇你頂多幾句，點有人睇這個c389 post。

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-30 00:54

你可以要求政府立例，加設男基（女方），男基（男方），女基（男方），女基（女方）的廁所，更衣室等地方。又要所有團體以後開設多４個組別給你們參加，以往男子組、女子組，現今加多男基女組、男基男組、女基男組、女基女組囉。 ...
satil 發表於 2011-4-29 19:44

Like your idea.

If they request the government to have dedicated washroom/changing room, I have no problem at all.

Even though I might have the opportunities to 偷窺 girls by walking into a female changing room, but I don't want my girl to be 偷窺 by other guys.

作者: blue20ae 時間: 2011-4-30 07:19

wow, 誤導, c-389與discriminate gay有什麼關係.

satil 發表於 2011-4-29 15:25

作者: somewhereintime 時間: 2011-4-30 12:00

回復 46# satil

Well said

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/)