About this submission

A youth of our times is summoned by a evaluatory system far above his reach to make testimony of his right to speak, opinionate, and in other words, think of his own free will. The presiding court appears ambivalent to the words of the individual stemming from a perceived 'identity'. Thus his 'identity' precludes his definitive nature, and the words of an individual are deemed "inconsequential". The verdict is self-evident...

Join the Discussion