I am about to ask a serious but utterly reprehensible question

[The Grand Nudger]

For those who argue against objective morality, there isn’t really a problem (how is rape wrong under a subjective morality)

About a million ways, it's wrong in as many ways as there are subjective moralities that say so.  Silly question.

However; that is a different subject; and I’ll assume objective morality in the answer.  

You failed at that, right at the beginning.

I think that there are a couple of aspects to your question.  The first has to do with why something is wrong.   In the case of rape, I think that this has more to do with the why; rather than the what is occurring. 

If there's a "why" component it's no longer objectively wrong.  It's subjectively wrong, pursuant to the "why".  What a flexible moral system for rape.

C.S. Lewis made the distinction of intentions when discussing morality, rather than the outcome.  He stated, that we are angry with the person, who attempts to trip us up, yet fails.  But not angry with the person who trips us by accident; even when the result is injury. There may initially be some emotion from the injury or embarrassment, but I think that for a rational person, this should subside.    Now from the principle in your example, the second case is “far worse” in result, so shouldn’t we be able to compare them?  I think that the answer is no, because the intentions do make a difference.   In the case of rape, the motivations are selfish, and set themselves on something that God has set apart to be Holy.  

So, good rape/bad rape...good hell/bad hell? It's all about intentions. Really?  

The second aspect, is that I think you are working from a pop culture caricature of hell.  A Greek Orthodox would describe hell and the torment therein; as a result of separation from God.    I do agree with this view, but also think that some can take it too far (making it purely emotional and  self-inflicted), and I believe ignoring some parts of scripture.  While I believe that most of the descriptions of hell in the Bible are symbolic; they still represent that which they are symbolizing.  What the Bible describes is the consequences of sin, and the result of separation from God.  

Good thing you have a biblical decoder ring. Locking me in a dark room, knowing that I'll go nuts, is still locking me in a dark room. My own little ticks drive me nuts...but it wouldn't be thus without your participation. What was that about intentions again? What's wrong with simply expiring, ceasing to be...why is that not an option in your gods little scheme?

So the answer is no; I wouldn’t agree with what you proposed, or do anything like that.  I don’t think that it is an equivalent comparison, nor accurate of the Biblical description.  I also assume that you are speaking of a fairly young child; in which case, I’m not going to have a discussion the way you represented it; in the first place.

Why not?  If their soul is in such peril perhaps they should know that..bluntly, it's not exactly like we're talking about a scraped knee here, or stitches?