Clearly, the Ten Commandments bother people. There are some that Americans seem to be ok with, others not so much. In Giles County, where the Ten Commandments were displayed in the "public" schools for a time, the debate over God's Top 10 is raging once again. Heaven forbid our kids be influenced by "though shalt not steal." The Supreme Court has split the baby, so to speak, on the issue. According to the anointed nine, if the motive for the display of the Commandments (on "public property") is secular, it's constitutional. If, however, the motive is "religious," cue the wreaking ball. It is up to judges to determine the motive. (Clearly that's what the Founders were shooting for).

Enter federal Judge Michael Urbanski. He's trying to get to the bottom of Giles County's motive, and has indicated that he's very, very worried that the display of the Ten Commandments might be motivated by, gasp, religion. So, he's come up with a unique suggestion.

Just display the six "non-religious" Commandments. Seriously.

If only Moses had thought of that first, imagine the trouble we could have avoided.

But then again, we're not doing so well with the "bottom six" are we? It seems that lots of Americans are pretty offended by the whole "don't commit adultery" thing. So here's my suggestion:

Let's put the Ten Commandments to a vote. Put all ten on the ballot, but you only get to keep five. The top five vote-getters stay, the bottom five, well, too bad. After all God, we know better than You about these things. Times have changed. We're, well, progressive. Your silly rules are just so oppressive.

Besides, we don't want some activist federal judge to decide which of the Commandments are still useful. That simply goes too far. We're Americans. We live in a democracy. Let's do what we do — put it to a vote.

May the best five win!

Hey, it's no worse an idea than Judge Urbanski's.