If you accept Judge Moore's view, the Buddhist art would be no problem at all, because Buddhism isn't a "religion" for purposes of the 1st Amendment. But, then again, if you accept Judge Moore's view, neither is the world's third largest religion.
Judge Moore says that the judeo-christian culture is an assumption that underlies our constitution. One would have to be ignorant of history to disagree with that.
Therefore, he has a basis for making a "most favored culture" claim for judeo-christianity. That's OK with me.
However, my 3 issues which I think support Judge Moore are:
1. No religion established.
2. Moore was in charge of setting up displays, art, etc. in the building.
3. The monument includes a history of the development of law angle.