I would guess that's the case because the risks associated with sex are not in any way similar to the risks similar to the risks associated with driving a car. For example, one could drive a car in such a way that causes say a coach full of people to plough into a bridge support on a motorway at 60mph, or a lorry to jack-knife in busy traffic and causing a multi-car pile-up.
And yet CNN didn't have any problems describing what they thought of the crime or the perpetrators in the video of this news article:
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/05/asia/pakistan-teen-girl-killed/index.html
What about the poor perpetrators of this crime? What about their lives that have been ruined by this crime? Emotional adjectives are also used several times in this clip regarding the severity of the crimes committed, yet not once for the steubenville rape case report.
I watched the video and read the article and I have no idea what your point is. The only people that were making moral judgements were the people interviewed. The reporters did not.
We dont live in a culture that accepts rape as okay. Most accept that rape is going to happen and that we should do something about it, but most understand that you will never get the rate to zero (zed). Just because there are people that rape does not make the culture one of rape. Just because a few choose to do the act does not make it supported in any way by the culture.
Accepting that something will happen does not mean you are supporting that it happens. I think that is the main difference here.