It shouldn't make any difference whether a religous display is "appropriate" or "offensive". The question is whether it reflects a governmental bias toward one religion over another or a governmental bias in favor of religion over agnosticism/atheism (or "irreligion" as one of the justices called it yesterday).

This whole debate raises two thoughts with me. First, if the public display of the 10 Commandments is so important, why aren't more churches doing it? Here in Tallahassee, I don't believe that there is a single church that has an outdoor monument of the 10 Commandments. I don't recall seeing any in my visits to other areas either. It certainly doesn't appear to be as important to the religious right to create a public display as it is to create one on public lands. Second, the recent rulings seem to put the religious right into a bit of a tricky situation.  No one else seems to want to create these monuments, but it is only clearly impermissible if it is done to further religion which is the rr's aim.