How can any court in their right minds, consider anything administered by, in this case, self appointed “therapists”, a “point of view” and thus protected by th

How can any court in their right minds, consider anything administered by, in this case, self appointed “therapists”, a “point of view” and thus protected by the first amendment? Wouldn’t this open the door for any other sort of dangerous belief? Perhaps denying actual medical help in favour of “thoughts and prayers”?