Usually these harsh rape laws are only used when a man's wife gets raped by another man. The offense is more against the man whose wife was raped, rather than the woman rape victim herself. This can be clearly demonstrated by the fact that if the man rapes his own wife, or even in some cases where the man lets another male relative in the family rape his wife, it's not really looked upon as anything so terrible. Also if the woman is seen as a "whore", the rape is seen as much less serious; in that case the rapist has not really taken anything away from the husband that he has not already lost. In that culture, the virtue of the woman is seen as an asset of her husband. The men don't want to keep a wife who's not "clean", meaning if they've been defiled by some other man. In addition to that, it's considered shameful in many parts of the Middle East for a man to be married to a woman who has been raped. The analogy in Western culture would be like a man marrying a slut who has slept with a thousand men and done all sorts of disgusting things. The man is taking in tainted goods, a soiled dove. Traditionally in that part of the world the husband of the woman who was raped could be bought off with blood money, to compensate them for their wife's loss of virtue, but in many cases the men were so angry that no amount of money could buy them off and they demanded nothing less than the death of the rapist. The woman herself was not really seen to have her own will so much in many cases, especially younger women. They were traditionally seen as more naive and infantile, like some passive object that couldn't say no.
How about staying on-topic as opposed to bring in non-related drivel? Address the topic at hand, or is that too hard for you? On the topic itself: Welcome to Sharia Law, where minors are cattle, women are slaves and everyone else, especially Jews, ought to be persecuted and executed.
Reminds us of David (soon to be King of Israel), who committed adultery with the wife of a warrior companion who David later murdered. Not to mention 'GOD' himself who - according to some lying prophets - authorised the Israelis to commit genocide, during the conquest of the Promised Land. [One thing for sure: if there IS a divine principle in this world, it sure doesn't authorise genocide on "sucklings"...…] It's a pity Muhammed looked to the Old Testament and it's lying prophets, for his 'truth' about the One True God. The Old Zoroastrian religion - good versus evil - would have been a much more solid base for a new religion.
Yes today the Islamic world is in chaos - aided and abetted by the intrusions of the 'Christian' West (mainly Britain, then US) into Muslim lands in the last 2 centuries, plus some residual Jewish OT-inspired fundamentalism; eg Rabin's murder resulting in the collapse of the Oslo Accords.