religious symbolism should be removed from America's courtrooms

You have some unique points on how coveting can be a positive source of motivation and how pretending to believe in another God is a sin for many religions. Nonetheless, I shall begin by rebutting those points and move on to the constructive.Firstly, the source of motivation I believe you were referring to was desire, as opposed to coveting someone else's assets (the commandment is specific in that it is about wanting what someone else's, your neighbour's, property). So the commandment itself was referring to desiring someone else's property and possessions, which is the root of most theft. Desire to have something and working hard to get it is not what this was referring to. Envy is not going to be a secure source of motivation for honest work, it is a good source of motivation for cheating one's way to success.Second of all, the court does not require a person to state that they believe in the Christian God. What it has is commandments on the wall and the fact that one must swear on the bible before entering the courtroom. Having a commandment on the wall regarding believing in another God is not actually saying that you are abiding by that commandment, it is saying that whoever designed that court and runs that court abides by that commandment and is proud to hang it on the wall. If it offend you, merely look away form the wall, it is quite an odd habit to stare at what is written on a wall anyway. So far as swearing on the bible is concerned, there is no religion that bans swearing on another holy book, they only ban believing in what the contents of that book is. By swearing on the bible that you will be honest in the courtroom it is just using the main religion of USA to represent a symbolic promise to honesty in the courtroom, they are not asking you in any way to say you believe in the bible or in the Christian God only that you swear on it that honesty shall be held.A final point to consider is that of you stating that 'In a nation that claims religious freedom, then no favoritism should be shown in a government building.'. There is a very clear rebuttal here, despite being a Christian-based institution, all courtroom are not allowed, and do not carry out, any favouritism of Christians over any other religion, nor over the non-religious. It is a room of objective justice brought by several jury members and a judge all of whom would, them-self, be put into prison if such favouritism was found to be carried out.Now to being my constructive, despite not being originated from the Christian religion anymore, the American laws do coincidentally almost all reside to some extent, to the morals and values displayed in the bible. The reason is that most religions are based on a common human's ethics and therefore most laws coincide with these religions.Also comes the issue of practicality, at the moment there are 94 U.S. district courts and 13 Appeal courts (source: http://www.uscourts.gov...) you want to convince the government who both relies on them to make important decision of justice and actually is run by the government to change the religious values they hold? Not only is that a waste of time but actually it would offend Christians who are the majority of the USA, a governments job is to maintain a society and in a democracy such as USA the majority does win. That is how politics has worked in democratic nations for many years.In conclusion, it would be impractical and against the government's role for them to force courts to abolish their religion. The court does not force one to follow the commandments it merely has them on the wall and most laws are based upon them anyway.