Thanks robomatic.

While not departing from my original position, there are some good secular points to be made by the Ten Commandments, no matter what religion one aspires to, whether they are posted in public or not:

That in worshipping God we avoid worshipping humans.

I disagree with the idea that this one fits the criteria of a secular point. For one thing, there may be religions that involve worshiping people. But also, using myself as an example, I don't have a concept of "worship" in my spiritual belief system. That word has no meaning to me. Same with any attempt to define divinity. According to my own spiritual beliefs, to define divinity is to limit it. And in my belief system, divinity is not something that can be limited. Worshipping something requires some degree of definition of what is being worshipped. Also, according to the what I believe, to worship something is to create a separation between the self and the thing being worshipped. In my spiritual beliefs, there is no separation between the self and divinity. So the use of the word "worship" violates my spiritual beliefs.

Ron Davies...

If the posting of the ten commandments is determined, under the establishment clause, to have the effect of promoting the monotheistic religons over others, the demonstrable harm caused to me by the court having taken the case against me by that attorney, could (and should, in my opinion) be used as an example of the negative effects that this promotion of the monotheistic religions has on people who are not of those religions. The posting of the ten commandments is only one example of the ways in which the monotheistic religions are promoted by the US government. But it happens to be the one that we are discussing in this thread.