Suppose my religion believes that God wants men to rape women to demonstrate male superiority and female subordination and fecundity. Can I donate a statue of a man raping a woman to the city, and make them put it in the park based on the argument that if they accept a granite carving of the 10 commandants, then they have to accept my sculpture too?

It could be considered art as in Sabine Women

<link>-

IF you want to make it reasonable for the government to accept a granite carving of the 10 commandments then yes, they have no basis for rejecting your Rape of the Orion Women.

Simple solution - get rid of the public 10 Commandments monuments.

The TX case was different in that the 10 Commandments were being displayed in a more limited context - namely in the context of its historical law giving content (yes a stretch but a plausible one). No such equivilence exists in the Pleasant Grove case

rockfsh:

It could be considered art as in Sabine Women

<link>-

I agree that that is art, BUT, the sabines were KIDNAPPED and "encouraged" to marry the Romans, not "raped" as we would think of it today. Since they were given rights, for the time that's not too bad, although reprehensible by today's standards.

Yeah they were raped. Women were chattel, they had no ability to consent or deny their hand in "marriage". "Bride Theft" was commonplace and was essentially rape of someone enslaved to the "husband"/captor

...which continued until the Renaissance (in some places later) in "christian" (read catholic) Europe. Women were chattel property into the 20th century.

Marital Rape as a legal theory only comes onto the scene in the 1950s

Once you are proposing something honoring an illegal act, I think you are out of bounds. You need to come up with a challenge that does not honor illegality.

The "rape" of the Sabine women comes from a mistranslation of "rapere" which is more accurately translated as kidnapping in the context of people, or theft in the context of objects.