I will be absolutely honest with you. The verses you quoted were amazingly well pulled out.
In the EXACT same chapter, you find contradictions with your statement.
Deuteronomy 22:22 talks about putting both the man and woman to death for committing adultery.
Deuteronomy 22:23 - 24 :"If there is a betrothed virgin, and a man meets her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife. So you shall purge the evil from your midst."
Here we have explicit wording stating that the young woman "did not cry for help", very well implying that rape cases would result otherwise.
Deuteronomy 22: 25 - 27 states that that a man who "rapes" a betrothed woman be put to death.
There are actually many commentaries on this. It is important to understand that the Hebrew words used in Deuteronomy 22, verses 25 and 28 do not necessarily indicate rape. In verse 25, the Hebrew word chazaq is used, and it essentially means “seize,” or “take hold of.”
Three verses in the same chapter that says the opposite.
If you want to insult Christians, use your brain and do it properly. Don't waste your time arguing for the sake of arguing.
EDIT: For one thing, it is clearly written "rape" in deuteronomy 22:25, which results in only the man being put to death. There is no mention of "rape" in the two verses you quoted. And as I stated above, the word "chazaq" is used, and it means "seize", or "take hold of". Rape is mentioned explicitly in one verse, while it isn't in the other. If you can imply that 28-29 implies rape when it never mentions it, why can't it be consensual in which "take hold of" is of the appropriate usage?
"People" quote the OT all the time. Certainly. You do however, realise that Christianity has many different branches, and not every branch subscribes to the Westboro Baptist Church's way of thinking. There are many different interpretations of the OT. I'm going to refrain from answering your other questions as this could take up more space. If you have more questions, simply create another question. All I can say is, it is extremely naive to think that all bible advocates are ignorant, homosexual hating people. Trust me, the atheism - religion debates go extremely in-depth.
Here I am speaking from a neutral standpoint, and even I can find proper commentaries simply by googling the verse.