I wonder if this aversion to conflict was part of the reticence of dealing with social issues in this election. I don’t think it’s that most people agree with either same sex marriage or abortion—in truth, I think a lot of people honestly don’t care that much—it’s that they don’t want us to talk about it. Our society, though, is changing quickly, and you can’t just ram that kind of change through without talking about it, or you’ll tear the country apart. People need to feel included, not railroaded.

So, to start the discussion, I offer you a series of scenarios our grandparents would never even have dreamed of. Let’s say a boy was raised by his maternal grandparents until the age of ten, while his mother was largely absent from his life. His mom, meanwhile, cleaned herself up, secured a stable job, married her lesbian lover, and decided she wants her son back. He moves in, and then she applies to have her new spouse adopt the boy. The boy does not wish to be adopted by this woman, but the courts overrule him, claiming his refusal is simply because his grandparents have taught him to be homophobic.

Two years later, his biological mother dies in a car accident. The boy wants to live with his maternal grandparents. The spouse, though, now has legal custody of him. Will his wishes be granted?

Here’s another one: a wealthy Muslim immigrant dies, leaving a sizeable estate. His second wife, whom he married in Saudi Arabia but left behind, petitions for her share of the estate. Wanting to be fair, Canadian courts grant it to her on the grounds that she also is a widow, and give her immigrant status. Multiple wives have now been recognized in Canadian courts, so a man in his 30s tries to marry a 19-year-old girl, the cousin of his current wife, who has recently moved here from the Middle East. She does not speak English well and is not aware of her rights, but her family insists the girl wants the marriage. What will happen to her? What will happen to the first wife and her children?

Or here’s another one. A 17-year-old girl is pregnant. She decides adoption is the best route because she wants her baby to have a good future. She asks the Children’s Aid Society to place the baby with a married, stable heterosexual couple. Can such a wish be granted anymore?

A young mother is a devout Catholic, and takes her two children to mass regularly and prays with them daily. Her ex-husband, who is gay, does not wish custody of the children and is happy to have her raise them as long as he gets visitation. However, he petitions the court to demand that his ex-wife stop taking the children to church or reading them the Bible, on the grounds that raising his children as Christians automatically makes them bigoted and undermines his rights as a father. Who will win? Who should win?

A church in downtown Toronto has been operating a soup kitchen, shelter, job placement program, and health clinic for the homeless for thirty years, helping thousands each year. It has a large budget, most of which goes to its ministry on the streets. A homosexual couple asks to be married in the church and they are denied. The couple sues the church and wins. The church is told that it is in violation of a human rights code, and must marry homosexual couples or its charitable status will be revoked. What happens to the homeless shelter?

Already some of these scenarios have occurred. The rest will inevitably follow. Many reading this won’t have a problem with these scenarios, and that’s fine. But let me leave all of you with this: if we don’t talk now, and let society continue to move on, what scenarios will we be facing a decade from now? In the words of Joan Rivers, can we talk?