THERE are some big ticket issues in the north's constantly revolving, political crisis hamster wheel that seem impossible to resolve.
Such is the difference of opinion and direction of the two main parties on major issues such as Brexit - an event that will change our lives and the lives of our children for generations - you have to wonder how devolution lasted as long as it did.
Now step away from Northern Ireland's future constitutional and economic place in the European Union and the island of Ireland and there are still all the niggling, outstanding, unresolved local issues.
Legacy is a major stumbling block in countless negotiations, an issue filled with hurt and at times misunderstanding and misinformation.
Ian Paisley junior last week defended comments he made about during a radio interview about the shooting of IRA man Colum Marks in Downpatrick 26 years ago, remarks that left even this cynical reporter shocked.
Marks was shot dead by the RUC in contested circumstances, people hold differing views on when a killing goes from protection of life to shoot to kill, and that's all part of the complex place we live in.
In a normal society it would be for a judge and jury and not a politician to decide what makes a killing lawful or illegal.
But we do not live in a normal society and people have had different experiences of the Troubles, whether they lived in a loyalist or republican community, a security force family or none of the above
But to describe the killing of any human as being as being 'dispatched' as the North Antrim MP did repeatedly during the interview was deeply offensive language.
Parcels are dispatched, humans beings are not, to dehumanise any person, regardless of how they chose to live their life, does a disservice to Paisley and weakens his defence of the RUC men present on the scene that night.
It also makes you wonder how we ever expected to have a legacy agreement at all when coming from such a low starting point.
Addressing yet another political stumbling block, party colleague Jim Wells said last week he would consider his position in the DUP should the party fail to use a petition of concern to block same sex marriage.
He also said that a number of other party members were ready to walk over the issue.
“Peter will not marry Paul in Northern Ireland,” he said for added emphasis.
Wells's comments at this stage do not matter a jot as we have no working assembly, and therefore like every other issue, any change to the legislation to allow equal marriage is not in local hands.
And so you have to wonder for whose benefit Mr Wells was staging his latest hissy fit.
Respecting other people's religious views is one thing, allowing those with extreme views to shape legislation that denies equal rights to all our citizens is another entirely.
It is always better to convince people of the merits of your argument on social issues than force them upon others.
Something that was beautifully demonstrated during the Republic's referendum on same sex marriage, when many elderly people brought up in a Catholic Church controlled state voted in favour of equality.
But for some you just have to accept their views are so entrenched they will never be persuaded. Jim Wells is unlikely to ever head up a float at gay pride but he is out of step with society and must accept the democratic will of the majority without constantly blocking change.
The June snap general election is not going to resolve the political crisis, in fact the process of fighting an election is so polarising it will only serve to widen the current political impasse.
However, with direct rule looking increasingly likely there is a very real chance outstanding issues will be dealt with by a Westminster official and decisions imposed on Northern Ireland regardless of the will of the people.
Jim Wells and his supporters should be aware that this will likely mean same sex marriage passed in law, just as it is in the rest of Theresa May's fiefdom, because few people outside of our political right wing can understand the continuing barrier to progress.
More controversially it mean legacy arrangements will be forced into place, and as this paper has reported the Conservatives preferred solution is a 'line the sand', saving money and reputation as state secrets remain under lock and key.
We are in dark, uncharted times - not just locally but globally - and a little humanity in the language used by those with political power would go a long way to helping ease that journey into the unknown.
