zlacker

My entire existence is politically controversial. I pretty much have to at least be aware of recent political developments since they could affect my ability to live as myself

>>voidUp+(OP)
Then why read news and not directly read the new laws and regulations that were voted and passed, or new proposed laws under discussion?

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...

>>M95D+b2
News gives you a heads up on what could be coming before laws were passed, or overall sentiment of the population or the politicians. Sometimes it's not about new laws, but about new interpretations, enforcements, court rulings etc.

>>M95D+b2
There's way too much going on to follow all of it, and most of the important stuff isn't written down. By the time the text of bills is available, the politicians and influencers have been discussing things for a long time and the opportunity to do anything about it is nearly gone.

Perhaps we could pay people to follow important topics, politicians, important lobbyists and see what they're doing and claiming they want to do. They could send us summaries to save us time.

We could call those people journalists.

>>M95D+b2
Because it doesn't give you the Zeitgeist?

>>voidUp+(OP)
i agree, it's probably comfortable to "not read the news" or "not be into politics" or whatever, except when politics is into you

>>M95D+b2
Because not everything is done as EU law. Frequently its an executive order or a directive passed down from national minister or other govt official to their branch or other branches to make their base happy at expense of people currently blamed for govt’s failures.

Eg. no law in Poland regulates legal gender change process. But there is a series of directves for courts on how this should be addressed issued by whoever is in the govt at the moment. One govt issued a directive that those are low prority, other that spouse and children should have a power to veto, another that actually those are high priority and then govt-appointed judges in the supreme court decided to veto the veto and implement new procedure altogether. And none of this is in the law - just directives for judges from pliticans and higher judges.

>>voidUp+(OP)
Your entire existence? That sounds kind of hyperbolic, unless you're being targeted by genocide.

>>M95D+b2
Threats are not necessarily originating from laws or their execution. And not everyone has the time to read all laws, or is able to fully understand them and their impact on your well-being.

>>berryc+i4
I'm trans. I live in the UK. I know it's not as bad as some middle eastern countries, but I'm still being actively legislated against

>>M95D+b2
Because I live in the UK, and we aren't part of the EU anymore

>>M95D+b2
Anti-LGBT zones in Poland were not officially introduced via state law.

Neither were out bishops speaking about rainbow disease and calling us all ideology, not people.

You are privileged if you can afford to only rely on official sources.

>>berryc+i4
Tell me you're in majority without saying you're in majority.

>>berryc+i4
> Your entire existence? That sounds kind of hyperbolic

In the USA today (and many other places, but I'm in the US), anyone of any kind of minority is the target of beatings, kidnappings and possibly public executions by the government right now. Not exactly something you can ignore.

>>Purple+f5
It probably takes less time to read those laws than it does to follow the hyperbole pushed by the media. Read them, discuss them with others - like-minded as well as those with a different view - and try to form your own opinions. If you rely on the media to curate your opinions you're just being groomed by one party or the other. In that case at least follow both the media which you most often agree with as well as those which you disagree and try to find out the truth behind the half-truths and lies pushed by them.

>>voidUp+i7
Do you mean the Supreme Court case last year? I thought that just covered interpretation of equalities law for single-sex exemptions, not actively legislating against anyone.

>>Ralfp+Q3
1) So we should just read the news?

2) It was just an example. Each person should study their aplicable law-making process.

>>Araina+e3
But then, some rich people could pay them more to focus on certain subjects and ignore others.

>>voidUp+i7
Unless there are laws proposing to execute trans people (which I very much doubt but I'm not exactly following UK politics), your "entire existence" is not up for debate. Saying so is just a hyperbole which muddies the waters.

>>jjav+id
That is not remotely true. We can have a discussion about the government's excesses, but in no way is everyone of all minorities subject to such things. The vast majority of people in the US, minority or otherwise, are living their lives peacefully without any sort of threat hanging over them.