Is having the Ten Commandments in a state judicial building...

[The Duke]

Not only does the 14th Amendment apply the Fedeal Bill of Rights to the states, but the Constitution also says the Federal Government must guarantee "a republican form of government" to the states.  The states could not simple trample the religious rights of individuals just because they aren't "congress".

It would also be silly to presume that the Founders would go to all the trouble of ratifying the Bill of Rights that restricts only the Federal Government, but allows the state of California to force me to convert to Buddhism, take my guns away, place the National Guard in my house without my consent, and suspend my right to habeas corpus.  OF COURSE THE BILL OF RIGHTS EXTENDS TO STATES!

[The Duke]

Because the first amendment very clearly states "Congress shall pass no law..." The others are explicit rights.

What I think John Ford is talking about is, in the 14th amendment: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

This is a truism. The Constitution was already the supreme law of the land, and the second through eighth amendments were already supreme over state law. If it wasn't, an amendment to the Constitution couldn't make itself supreme over the states anyway.

So you believe there is no right to free speech?  Or religion?  Or the press?  Only a restricition on congress from infringing these things?

I think you'd be hard pressed to find much support for this idea in the writings of the foudners or from subsequent constitutional scholars.