The sages frequently liken the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai to a chuppah (wedding ceremony), where Hashem is symbolized by the chosson (groom) and the Knesses Yisroel is symbolized by the kallah (bride).
In a similar analogy, the Sages liken the construction of the Golden Calf to adultery under the wedding canopy. In similar spirit, a midrash quoted by Rav Moshe Shapiro, brings that the 2nd commandment on the First Tablet (prohibition of idolatry) corresponds to the 2nd commandment on the Second Tablet (prohibition of adultery).
In this spirit, if we were to continue the analogy, there is a halacha that a woman who cheats on her husband becomes prohibited both to the husband and to the one she cheated with, and her husband must give her a divorce. If that is so, why didn't Hashem have to divorce us, G-d forbid?
I thought to answer following the Maharal in the introduction to Ohr Chadash where he writes that one of the reasons Hashem forced us to accept the Torah was to "tie His hands behind His back" so-to-speak -- since a rapist who rapes a girl, if she desires, must marry her and he can never divorce her again.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to work in our case. The rapist has a lo taaseh (negative commandment) not to divorce and an oseh (positive commandment) to divorce, and it appears, if a wife were to cheat on a rapist, he has an obligation to give her a divorce.
Is there ability to halachically extend/justify this analogy? Thank you very much.