If the threshold for "high danger" to secularism is religious imagery in governemnt issued things, then probably most of the world would be classified as "high danger." This would, as you could guess, make the whole metric pointless against actual dangers.
Nitpicking these small things first instead of showing the big thing first, like you did, is counter productive. People aren't affected by phrases in money, but they sure as hell will be affected by that in the article, so start with that.
Huh...? Is this an actual thing you actually believe in?