“The concept of man is not an easy one to postulate,
is not an easy one to simulate,
is not an easy one to duplicate,
is not an easy one to emulate.
The concept of man is fraught with difficulties when there is no original on which to base design,
on which to plot and play,
on which to scribble and erase.
The concept of man is easy to accept when within the sphere of being,
when within the sphere of man’s reality,
when within the sphere of the physicality of man.
The mind of man has difficulty in grasping the concept of ‘not being’,
the concept of non-existence,
the impossibility of such odds being attained in the actuality of existence.
The mind of man resolves,
by accepting in support,
the practicality of evolving that which stands before them.
The mind of man takes the existence of man as ‘proof’ of the reality of evolution:
the absence of design discharging God of all input to the freewill being in existence,
deducting the morality of God as the lynchpin of behaviour.
So man reduces self-control to be measured by his ethics –
ethics which are always relative to he who can be the announcer of the day,
are never absolute in value,
have no integrity of purpose other than for he who shouts the loudest,
who carries the largest stick,
who imposes his opinion on those with no opinion.
So the agency of man is reduced to the synopsis of the fool in equality with the wise,
is reduced to the impotence of gibberish from every mind of man,
is able to affirm a topsy-turvy world where good and evil no longer have existence –
becoming mixtures of each other from which everyone can drink without fear of conviction.”