Jurisprudence is as independent of my feelings with US federal/state/local law as with Biblical judgments. Sounds like you prefer the “rule of man” to the rule of law in any case. Should all govern according to personal feelings?
I see with every new post you get more and more evasive. It’s not my fault that you dislike the specific meanings of “khazaq” and “taphas”.
But if you’re trying to ask me if I regard the case in Deuteronomy 22:28-29 as being equivalent to today’s case of statutory rape, then I say it is—and would also say that the judgment listed therein is equivalent to what Jesus described as one written by Moses because of the “hardness of (the Israelites’) hearts”. (I don’t know how you would want that act punished.)
Dislike? I'm fine with them. Especially since you made it clear that you can taphas a girl (manipulate, i.e. seize; chiefly to capture, wield, specifically, to overlay; figuratively, to use unwarrantably:--catch, handle, (lay, take) hold (on, over), stop, surprise, take.) ...and your only punishment is that she has to marry you. You have made my case for me. And I love you pretending over and over that seizing, capturing and holding a girl isn't rape.
But if you’re trying to ask me if I regard the case in Deuteronomy 22:28-29 as being equivalent to today’s case of statutory rape, then I say it is—
Okay. Now. Do a little mind exercise. Ask yourself if they thought so back then. Did they? Is there anything in the Bible that, say, sets an age at which a girl can be married? Sets an age at which a girl can be said to consent?
In fact, since you're the expert, can you please tell me the terms used for a betrothed damsel as opposed to an unbetrothed one? Clearly they are using a different term in 22:25 than in 22:28.