The whole concept behind the biblical call for "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is that the punishment exacted should not be harsher than the damage done to the victim of the crime. A person doesn't "recover" from a rape in five or ten years, the trauma lasts for the rest of one's life.
Prisons exist for but a single reason, to punish those who have harmed others. The purpose of a prison is not to rehabilitate, it is to punish and instill penitence for the harm they have caused. Now, I'm sure that the author doesn't comprehend that the purpose of laws, police, the courts, and the prisons is so that a civil society is possible. Absent an actor who will punish those who do harm, the harmed become the actors who punish for the harm done to them, each according to their own sliding scale of whether the harm done to them falls under the category of an eye or a tooth.
One cannot have a civilized society absent the means to punish those who would harm others in the society. Does the author of this piece believe that the person who raped them should face no consequences at all and should be free to harm others in the society in the same manner in which they harmed the author? If not, what would be the author's preferred means of holding the person responsible for the rape accountable for the harm visited upon the life of the author?
It is one thing to be against any and all incarceration, quite another to be against any form of punishment for the damage done to the author by that person.
