Logically, gay marriage should not be banned

No - I'm not. Its a dumb topic and I personally agree with you, so my motivation level would be a total of 0 and my win ratio cannot take another debate like this.

I voted for you btw - I don't deserve to win this debate.

But I am interested in how you would answer my "Maximization of Happiness" arg. Can I get a brief overview?

BTW: I'd like to clarify my syllogism to:

Premise 1
Legally, marriage is only property rights.

Premise 2
Homosexuals can make contracts that are the exact same as marriage contracts without the name "marriage".

Premise 3
Therefore, homosexuals have the same legal rights as the married.

Premise 4
This leaves the other side of marriage; the spiritual side.

Premise 5
Marriage - in a non-legal sense - has traditionally been a religious and spiritual idea; things generally conflicting with the Homosexual community.

Premise 6
Some radical and fundamentalist portions of the community may and have taken violent action against homosexuals before.

Conclusion:
B/c No loss of rights occurs to homosexuals by not allowing them to marry, but by calling it "marriage", you actually expose them to the danger posed by premise 6. Therefore, we should not allow "gay marriage" in name; but rather more intelligently allow them to retain all the same rights as marriage without the violent physical danger.

Those arguments would be quite easy to grind into dust. You're welcome to create another debate and challenge me IF you are willing to follow through this time.

I was outta the country. Costa Rica ftw!

I was going to run something like:

Marriage = property rights in a legal sense.
Marriage = sacred to a large portion of the religious

Hence, no loss of rights comes from just allowing straight marrages, but more happiness is achieved.

your previous debate wasn't focused, so it accomplished nothing more than two people talking about two completely different things. Hopefully this one will be better