He is laughing at your pain.
I worked for about a year in Morristown, NJ. They have a seeing eye dog training facility* in Morristown (or they used to), so I saw a lot of people training seeing eye dogs and a lot people being trained in using a seeing eye dog.
I was sitting on a bench in the park in the center of town during lunch, enjoying a truly spectacular spring day, when I woman with a seeing eye dog stopped in front of me. The trainer ran up to her (they would follow behind a little once the person was a little more familiar with the dog) and asked her what was wrong and she told him she was a little overwhelmed, just let her rest for a minute. I later learned that she was fairly new to being blind and hadn't gotten her confidence back about being out in the world.
Anyway, a woman walks up to her and starts petting the dog (do NOT pet the service dog) and babbling on about her uncle who was blind and never left the house and what a burden he was on the family and how nice that this woman was brave and outside. Yeah, srsly.
She left, and I said, "I'd much rather be blind than be that stupid," and the woman laughed. We chatted for a while and then she had to get back to learning to use a seeing eye dog and I had to get back to work. I really hope everything worked out for her.
I think of this woman, in our society today, when we don't abandon the blind or assume sinfulness led to their condition, when they have programs to read the internet to them, books on tapes and seeing eye dogs, being so nervous about the world when I read this:
"In regard to the man born blind (John 9), the question was asked of Jesus, “Who’s sin was it, this man’s or his parents’, that he was afflicted with blindness?” Jesus said it was neither. In other words, the question was a false dilemma. And those who asked it were trying to reduce to two options something that had more than two. There was another option. Jesus said, “It wasn’t because of his sin or his parents’ sin. This person was born blind so that the power of God and the grace of God may be made manifest.” That person was suffering not from persecution. His suffering was used by God to bring honor and glory to Christ.
I mention this instance because it is a clear biblical case in which suffering has theological value – not merit, but value – insofar that it is useful to the purposes of God.
That is so cruel. There is no glory there, only the sort of rank cruelty that is the privilege of the able. Only a person who has never suffered so could say something like that.
Think of this man, 2,000 years ago, born blind. Think of his life. There were no accommodations, no Americans with Disabilities Act, no organizations to help the disabled, no seeing eye dogs or canes. He was pretty much at the mercy of his family and a primitive, superstitious world. A primitive, superstitious world that viewed his disability as clear evidence of sin.
Imagine that you had the power to set things on fire with your mind. Imagine further that you proved it by setting a complete stranger on fire. And then, as they screamed in agony, you said, "Hey, this is all to make me look good, stop complaining." According to Jesus, that's exactly what he did.
That isn't glory, that is cruelty on a breathtaking scale. And these people celebrate it.
*At first I assumed there was some sort of wide scale industrial accident leading to a much higher than normal incidence of blindness, but I never go for the obvious answer first.