There are other places in the Bible that show that a homosexual relationship is not approved of by God.
A claim not shared by all Christians. Like I said, it depends on which interpretation, translation, and compilation one adheres to. Some combinations are pro-gay, some are anti-gay, some are neither.
Just because it does not say explicity, "same-sex couples can't get married", even though same-sex relationships (or activities) are disapproved of, then that would mean that only sexless same-sex marriages would be allowed. At least that's where the logic points me based on your reasoning.
How? You were making the point that, because same-sex couples can't get married, they can only have sex
outside marriage, which is sinful. I rejected the "gays can't marry" premise with, "[N]owhere does the Bible say that same-sex couples can't get married." To argue otherwise would require you to condemn everything that wasn't explicitly condoned in the Bible; since this is absurd, I assume it is not the stance you take. Thus, because same-sex marriage is not explicitly condemned (nor, indeed, condoned), the onus is on you to justify your condemnation of it. As point out above, it is not even clear whether the Bible condemns homosexuality at all.
It does not sound like it would be a very fun marriage.
If your idea of 'fun' is homosexual sex, you might want to take an introspective moment.
I actually care about people, and I don't want to see anyone get led astray and go to hell. These discussions can be painful on both sides of this debate, but if just one person sees the real truth (whether it be your side or my side), then isn't it worth it to have this discussion? If we never tried to convince anyone of what is right then we truly should bring all the missionaries back home as well. Should we do that?
Quite frankly, yes. If Christianity (specifically, Catholicism) stayed out of Africa, the HIV/AIDS epidemic would not be as widespread in that continent. I'm an advocate of embracing other cultures, not submerge them with our own.
While I am aware of that particular aspect of debate (the chance that someone will be swayed to a new stance), I was pointing out that there is nothing
to debate: it inevitably boils down to semantic wordplay and an exercise in Hebrew and Koine Greek linguistics. I am interested in the truth, not building a ministry.
I included the translation I read it from so people can look it up and know that I am not paraphrasing this or making up the words to suit my beliefs.
On the contrary, you are: you are free to choose from a variety of equally valid translations, each one with its own set of possible interpretations. Though you can cite your sources, they are as arbitrary as anyone else's.