I'm having a hard time finding one unproblematic sentence here, whether logical or theological, other than perhaps the opening question. Satisfaction is not subjective but, in a survey context, public and communal. "Subjectivity" implies individuality. "Ultra liberal" is just name calling non-sense, and postmodernism is an era not a philosophy, and certainly not one that would make the impossible claim that all religions are equally valid, first because there are a diversity of cultural constructs which move between the category of "religion" over time, making the inclusion of whatever "all" religions are already problematic, but second and most important, if there were an identifiable philosophy in postmodern thinking, it would be that no religion, again, if we could even agree on what a religion is, has more than a perspectival view on questions of validity or truth. It doesn't mean everything's the same--to the contrary, the humility of human perspective seems to me to be one of the great themes of many biblical books and other religious texts. I dare not even try to talk about what your theology of money is so I won't assume what you think "your" money is in a clearly inequitable late capitalist system vs. what say Jesus might say about "your" money, but if you did go to a seminary or Divinity School unafraid to talk about how to use metaphors and avoid cliches, you might find some interesting characteristics to invertebrates...