If you support women in church leadership, it will soon lead to supporting homosexuals in church leadership – common hierarchical complementarian argument.
My first question to the above complementarian claim is: So what?
To expound a bit more: If it was true, if Christian egalitarians will support homosexual preachers or elders, so what? Why should the church exclude all homosexual preachers and elders? You need to make a case that gays – even celibate ones – should not be allowed to preach or lead at church. Only if your case is accepted by your listeners, can you say women preachers will lead to undesirable results.
My second question will be: Why?
Why do anyone believe that the ordination of women leads to the ordination of homosexuals? Is there a logical progression? How do churches allegedly go from A – the ordination of women, to B – the ordination of gays? It hardly makes any sense. On the contrary, I believe that almost every denomination large enough to have had more than 30 preachers in its time of existence have ordained homosexual males who hid their sexual preferences, or who vowed to be celibate. The ordination of homosexuals probably long predate the ordination of women in most denominations.
I don’t think the early church even asked someone’s sexual preference before calling him a preacher/ elder. They would have asked homo- and heterosexuals, men and women, to live a life of sexual purity, though.
You may interrupt here with: “We mean practising homosexuals!” Okay, if you mean practicing homosexuals, we could assume that “So what?” was answered. But “why?” becomes a bigger question – the gap you have to bridge between allowing female (a common state in which half of humanity is born) preachers, and practicing gay (a behavioral choice) preachers becomes even bigger.
Please do not make any assumptions on my view of homosexual church leaders. Readers of my mother tongue blog, by the way, assume the opposite of what you would probably assume. They associate opposition to homosexuality with opposition to atheism, and there I often spoke out against New Atheism.
And gay apologists, please do not take offense at the words “practising homosexuals.” I am perfectly aware of why some in the gay community dislike the term. I use it because it is a term those I address here would probably use.