No.

23 Jul

A facebook friend of mine shared a blog post her friend wrote about the Aurora shooting. This woman was not there, but she knows someone who was and is sharing her story. It’s here if you want to read it:

http://hugsandpunches.net/you-knit-me-in-my-mothers-womb-littleton-shooting/

The story is, a young woman was in the theater. She was shot in the face and underwent emergency surgery to try to save her life. The bullet was in her brain, and the doctors expected that she would likely die, and if she didn’t she wouldn’t be the same person she had always been.

But that’s not what happened.

She was saved by an anomaly in her brain. The shotgun happened to be aimed in the perfect way so that when she was hit, the bullet traveled into an area of her brain that was simply empty. She’s going to be fine.

I don’t want to in any way undermine how amazing this is. It’s incredible, and she is so lucky, and any story of someone surviving something so senseless is heartwarming and wonderful.

But I don’t like how the blogger explained it. 

“God knew when forming Petra’s tiny little body that 22 years later, evil would enter into the theatre where she sat. He knew. He knew she would need something to help keep her alive. He knew just how to do it and He somehow enabled the shotgun to be directed in a way to allow the bullet to perfectly travel through that little, tiny place in her brain that would protect her.”

 

I’m not religious, you all know that. And this is one of my main pet peeves about religious people.

So does God love Petra more than everyone else in that theater? He knew in advance of this shooting and is involved enough to give someone a brain anomaly that will save her life? How does that possibly make you feel better about the universe you live in?

God knows this is going to happen and saves Petra. He doesn’t save the 12 other people who died, including a 6-year-old girl. He doesn’t stop the shooting from ever happening. 

That would make me a lot more angry than it would reassured.

And it makes me angry when someone says that kind of thing because it implies that the person they know, that Petra, is more important than the people who died in that theater. That her life was worth saving and theirs weren’t. 

One less death is not something I would ever complain about. I was thrilled to read Petra’s story, amazed to hear about the bizarre CHANCE that she happened to be saved by something so unlikely. I am so happy for her, her family, everyone who knows her and loves her.

The implication, though, is that God chose to save her and chose to let a dozen others die. I hate that.

I know some of you have very different views on this whole God thing than I do. What do you think?

Advertisements

2 Responses to “No.”

  1. ianmulligan08 August 3, 2013 at 4:31 am #

    What bothers me is the assigned gender of God. Many in religious community see God as a masculine figure hence the “he” that this blogger used. If I am correctly remembering my classes at Gonzaga and the Catechism of the Catholic Church God has no gender assignment. I will reference the Catechism directly: “#239 . . . We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard:63 no one is father as God is Father.” There is answer and what bothers me upon initiation reaction.

    As far as Petra surviving I wouldn’t say that there was divine intervention. I am not someone who believes in the notion that God picks those who will survive and those who will be taken. That seems heavily unreasonable to me. Nor do I think those people were assigned the destiny or fate that awaited them that tragic night. I am happy that Petra survived and she may continue to live life. For those who I have died I am saddened for their loss.

    I will digress at this point as all of this seemingly creates a lot of discussion points. How we as humans view religion for one, and how people view God during times of sadness or happiness.

  2. Nicole July 24, 2012 at 11:12 am #

    I think the main difference here is the variant views of death between a religious and a non-religious person. For me at least, death has never been this horrifying thing, this gaping, black abyss that it is to atheists. It’s simply another path one’s life may take – into the arms of someone who loves you more than anyone else ever has or ever will (using the general “you” here so as not to cause offense). Death is sad because it causes temporary absence from friends, family, etc. and tragic when it comes unplanned, as in this instance. I’ve experienced this, having lost my cousins, who were very dear to me, during my freshman year of high school. But death is not the end, which I think is the worst part to many atheists/agnostics – the utter extinguishing of the beauty that was a human life. People of faith believe that part is not lost forever.

    So, not to put words in this blogger’s mouth, but I think she was expressing her happiness that Petra’s path had kept them together a little longer, rather than that she deserved a different outcome than the other victims. I respect your views and don’t mean to detract whatsoever from them, but I wanted to explain mine so that you might understand what others may believe. I know I’m always interested in learning about opinions and beliefs that differ from mine!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: