Random
Source Code
Random
The Moral World Cup is an award given to international cricket frauds, England. They have won this award every year except for 1932-1933, when they used dangerous tactic Bodyline to stop GOAT batsman, Sir Donald Bradman. The name for this award comes from the 2023 Ashes, when World Class fraud Johnny Bairstow left his crease and got stumped by Alex Carey fair and square. Since then England complain about the spirit of cricket, despite World Class English ghost Stuart Broad smashing it to Michael Clarke at first slip and not walking in 2013.
Other characteristics include losing constantly to six time World Cup winners Australia (in all formats), inability to retain the Ashes, winning a fraudulent World Cup final in 2019 (New Zealand are the actual winners), constantly complaining about the spirit of the game and making lame excuses for their poor performances in the 2023 World Cup, (despite Australia playing WTC, Ashes and CWC). England are truly finished but are the only team to ever win the Moral World Cup.
Guy 1: England are so finished, they lost to the sheep farmers, Afghanistan
Guy 2: At least they won the Moral World Cup
Who says you earned yours? Plenty of people knowingly engage in business with and trade with others who have bad reputations. Look at Mel Gibson, or Harvey Weinstein, George Soros, Alex Jones, YOU, Andrew Tate, I mean... The list goes on and on. A bad reputation is not a barrier to cooperation. You're even acknowledge that you have a degree of notoriety. So your reputation isn't good and if your reputation doesn't coincide with who you actually are than it's not a 'reputation' it's a 'facade.'
Hym "The retard is not the fiancé of the whore. Therefore, the retard coveted the fiancés whore-wife. Elon Musk coveted Johnny Depp's wife and you are perfectly willing to laud and cooperate with him. I haven't directly killed anyone yet but in your interpretation of 'speak softly but carry a large stick' you afford yourself the right to use violence. What I took I was allowed to take by people who where perfectly aware of the fact that I was taking it and was in exchange for my tolerance and I paid back anything else I've even taken with interest. All debts paid. And you are a literal charlatan who doesn't believe in an ontologically real God but rather a perennialist euphemism. Every time you arbitrate sin you take God's name in vain.
I also don't require myself to BE good. I am as all others are. Duplicitous. That's an imposition being made by you. You require me to be good. Because, as you said in your debate with Sam Harris, you either have to embody the spirit of christ (by becoming God unto Pharoah) OR you need subordinate yourself to dogma (Which is something you just made up and I require neither of those things). And what I've done demonstrate that not only are you not embodying Christ but your aren't even subordinate to your own perennialist dogma. And I did it publicly and now you're embarrassed. Frantically trying to do damage control to prevent yourself from being put in your proper place. Your problem is that you've largely over-represented the degree to which your virtue has been earned. I've called that into question and now I'm guilty of denying your 'self-evidently earned virtue' and 'damaging your reputation.' So, NOW you're using this to justify taking from me the only thing to which I have a claim (the contents of my own mind) and you're doing it out of spite. And I know what you do is not very difficult because you read a speech that I wrote for $100,000. I don't need unearned moral virtue. My righteousness is demonstrable. And I still HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN MY REFUND!"
A google search that is so morally/ethically disturbing the you can not mentally prepare yourself for the results and you abandon or question your quest for dark knowledge/humanity.
Morally-ungoogleable search - "how many sleeping pills will it take to "NOT" kill the baby, yet make it sleep"
Morally-ungoogleable search - "How can my Mommy be my Auntie and My Daddy be my Grandpa... and why do I have 6 fingers and 8 toes.. makes it hard to count good"
When Blizzard says morally grey they mean that they wanna make you intrigued with the story and later lowkick you with a reveal that's just a cop out.
Sylvanas is morally grey, it's not that simple, just wait and see. She burns down the tree because a random Night elf made her sad.
When Blizzard says Morally Grey they just wanna get you intrigued in the story and to later lowkick you with a cop out that's just not even grey...
Sylvanas is morally grey, it's not that simple, just wait and see. 9 Months later she burns down the tree because a random Night elf made her tell her backstory.
Morally grey is not what Sylvanas Windrunner is doing.
Killing a bunch of night elves becasuse you are pissed is NOT morally grey.