Questions, if the old laws were only for Jews/Israelites, should the new laws only be for Christians?
With respect to the open item of examples of things no longer adhered to, I'm speaking specifically to the issue of Christian folk citing abominations of the "Law" today, vs. your notation that the Law was for Israel and no longer is applicable. Is this a fault in the application of of use of the law as a tool for learning how god things? You mention that scripture should never be deemed invalid, even if inapplicable. I get that. But if God presented a law before and chooses to remove it from application, why does he not impose a new law in his series of revelations? Be leaving it open, does he not create a vacuum in which the laws of man emerge?
As to the Deut verses you reference, I believe you are using a version which does not cite the act as rape. There are obviously various versions and each version appears to use a varying degree of language relating to forcefulness. The primary distinction between 22-28 appears to be the marital status of the woman (married, unmarried betrothed, unmarried unpledged). I do agree that the language in the version you use is a lot less volatile. I can ask my dad (who speaks koine greek) to look into it sometime :) .