Supremely Courted InJustice
The U.S. Constitution's First Amendment
protects individual and collective rights
to practice religious beliefs
Whether these are monotheistic
or polytheistic
or pantheistic
or panentheistic
or even atheistic.
These beliefs and practices
must be religious
and not irreligious
Reconnecting
regenerative
good faith spiritual
re-associative
Not disturbingly disconnecting
degenerative
bad faith dispiriting
dis-associative.
This 1st Amendment does not give
re-ligious right or left,
or any Tao-theistic in-betweens,
freedom rights to claim we are not diversely
and multiculturally free
to practice our inter-religious synergetic faith
in robustly healthy
democratically inclusive governance
(and not unhealthy autocracies
or monopolistic theocracies).
The 1st Amendment does not support
anti-polytheistic members
with fundamentally dualistic
DivineGrace v HumanDisgrace theological positions
any divine manifest destiny right
to claim they are not free to practice
their irreligiously divisive evangelicalism
without governmental interference of any kind
because that government allows non-Christians
non-English speaking Buddhists and Taoists
and other inter-religiously connected
Divine and Human
Spirit and Nature
Mind and Body nondualistic indigenous wisdom traditions
their inter-religious rights
to practice their diversely theistic values.
The IrReligious Right is not 1st Amendment protected
to discriminate against,
and thereby marginalize,
those who are practicing religious values that are not commensurable
with their sometimes paranoid sectarian
One Straight White Patriarchal God
against polycultural-polytheistic
unstraight
unwhite
matriarchal Gaian Hypothesis
nonsectarian inter-religious pronoia values.
In that the word "religion"
refers to re-connecting
re-linking
re-synergizing positive relationships
between divinity and humanity,
any bad-faith actions
claiming monotheistic and/or moral authority
over Othered re-connecting nondualistic
panentheistic
indigenous wisdom
Holy Nature/Spirit traditions are,
from our theological peace-making perspective,
practicing their irreligiously dissociative,
DivineGrace v HumanDisgrace
divisive anti-gospel malpractices
against spiritual and mental
natural and physical
integrally healthy
regenerative, not degenerative,
sacredly wealthy and organically healthy
orthodox
neurosystemically resonant
authentically re-ligious practice.
While our 1st Amendment
to a Constitution
whose Preamble-stated purpose
is to "create a more perfect union"
does protect all theists from governmental interference
in freely practicing RELIGIOUS beliefs,
it does not follow
that this 1st Amendment protects monotheistically evangelical
irreligiously divisive actions
explicitly purposed to disturb out healthy democratic
inter-religious peace
as a nation
as a species
or as organically sacred residents
of a living water
blue/green regenerative
fertile
passionately pleasing
pronoia MotherEarth.
Copyright © Gerald Dillenbeck | Year Posted 2025
Post Comments
Poetrysoup is an environment of encouragement and growth so only provide specific positive comments that indicate what you appreciate about the poem. Negative comments will result your account being banned.
Please
Login
to post a comment