Of Purpose and Rebuttal
For the purposes of attribution in the discourse of common intrigue. When a person is degraded by unattributable causes, at what course is there to deny means of access? How of and which way is a proper means to an end? Is it good and proper to correlate personal degradation to a means of fundamental means of dereliction of public interest? In the context of personal attribution and physical correlation, do we stand to reason an injustice to purport and ascertain the quantitative value of a person? Should we stand in good stead to live with one another in peace and accord? Or should we be privy to the ligands of the curiosity tempered in the vices of pro tempore egalitarianism? Do we need to suffer the welts of a society within itself seemingly dire in need of probable reticence?
As the silence of a purpose is waking and the burdens of a great delusion form, the sufferings of a scant, nuanced few wake to a burden of shallow squalor. When found in dire straits, should we pick up and shake a mold and shatter the spirits a hundredfold? Does the brigand's noose fit a choir to the dreary and a mire from which an ethereal thunder peals? The shakes break from the bounds of the short field stakes in muck from time and sands to shores, seas to weathered clay. The earthen field is the weathered foundation of heavenly-showered praise. It needs to justify the times of lives lived, birthed, and suffering again. Should we live, love, lie, and let down to die? Does a fair folk gloom what can be found in sundry and lyre? Can we dance a jig and carry a tune? Does the comeuppance of a man lead to his downfall when his past is misused? Carry the muse once laid, twice buried, half to carry and dawdle the ruse. Of a world in measure, half part and half pleasure, we wake to see to it and learn to find a way to relate.
Comments