Question:
Is it true that the Torah requires rape victims to marry their rapists, and the only punishment to the rapist is a fifty-shekel fine paid to the victim’s father?
Response:
Actually the reverse is true: The victim is not required to marry the rapist; the rapist is required to marry his victim (if she consents), after paying her a very heavy fine.
The Talmud derives these laws from a close reading of the biblical passage:
“If a man finds a virgin girl who was not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give fifty [shekels of] silver to the girl’s father, and she shall become his wife, because he violated her. He shall not be able to send her away all the days of his life.”1
Noting that the Torah is usually economical with its words, the Talmud is surprised by the seeming redundancy of the phrase, “who lay with her.” We already know what this man did; why is it repeated?
From this the Talmud deduces that the fifty-shekel fine is merely a portion of his obligation; it is the portion he pays for the pleasure he took from his act. But this doesn’t compensate her for her pain, indignity and loss. The Talmud thus infers from this verse that in addition to the fine, the rapist is required to indemnify her for three forms of damage: the indignity she suffered, the pain she endured and the loss she incurred. In all, this amounts to a hefty fine.2
In addition, the rapist is required to marry his victim, and is not permitted to divorce her without her consent. The Talmud explains that this obligation rests on the rapist, not the victim. She is under no obligation to marry him.
Today it is hardly conceivable that a woman would choose to marry a man who had forced himself on her. In the not-so-distant past, however, women depended entirely on their husbands for protection and support. The rapist thus perpetrated a double crime against his victim: he violated her dignity and compromised her future, for with the stigma of rape upon her, it would now be exceedingly difficult for her to marry. The Torah is concerned not only with the pain she suffered in the past, but with her vulnerability in the future. Should she find herself without prospects for marriage, and should she want this man as her husband, the Torah requires him to marry her. In any case, whether the woman opted for this marriage or refused it, she was compensated for the damages caused by the rape.3
Another thing to bear in mind is the deterrent aspect of this law: the fact that a man knew that if he forced himself on a woman he would face not only a stiff punishment, but also the obligation to marry her and support her for the rest of his life without the ability to ever divorce her, might well have been a strong deterrent against such action.
Hashem gave us 613 commandments. Shouldn't one of them have been not to blame rape victims? The article says it would be hard for them to marry because they were raped. Why should it be hard to marry after being raped? One Commandment should say "Rape vicitms are just as worthy of being married as anyone else." The article says the marriage is for protection and support in those dangerous times. Does the Torah really think that once they're married, he won't keep abusing her and chose to protect her? Marriage is a sacred and powerful act between two people. How can the Torah use Marriage so carelessly? Rapists never deserve to get married.
Because back then s ociety would not longer view her as pure or a virgin. Back then raping a woman you were pretty much outcasting them as second hand wife which is not true but that's how it was view back then as messed up as it is to say why would they settle for that when they can marry a true untouched virgin