Deus ex Aequitas

I don't know about anyone else's readings -- including yours, Austin! -- but the overwhelming sense I get from this is innocence.  It was innocence that stole/tore apart "that thing" -- recklessness, carelessness, these do not come from experience, but rather a lack of knowledge or understanding of consequence.  I don't get any real sense of deliberation here -- if it was deliberate, there would not be such overwhelming remorse.  At first I read this as changing perspectives, but in the end it seemed that he who does the deed also suffers for it -- in destroying something through his own innocence, he destroys his innocence as well.  It is experience and understanding that begs for -- or demands -- atonement. 

The first stanza is delivered with such wry wit that I almost miss it through the rest of the poem -- each section is well contained and none are weak, but the deprecation becomes closer to flagellation throughout and the progression almost hurts.  The word play -- particularly in section 1 -- is excellent but I think you are skirting very close to overdoing it.  If you're going to use so much repetition, I'd actually like to see a few more of the other phrases sprinkled in.  A very minor thing, though, in a very fine poem.