This is really not one of those things that is open to much interpretation! Paul clearly says in several places that clergy may marry. He further says that it is a heresy to forbid marriage.
Why prohibit something that God clearly permits?
I don't deny that the church throughout history has condemned gnostic teachings, but some tenets have slipped through anyway. The notion of priestly celibacy can undeniably be laid squarely at the feet of gnosticism.
Celibacy is a practical oblgation. imposed on priests in the Latin rite. It has been retained because it has worked very well.
I would argue that it is not working very well at all. According to this article in the Kansas City Star, Catholic priests have AIDs at a rate of 4 times that of the general public. I would hardly tout that as a success story.
The problems encountered by the Protestant ministry/Orthodox priesthood do not take away from the benefits of a married clergy. My personal objection to the movement for a married clergy is that it is being driven by ideologues who make it part of a radical makeover of the Church.
I object as well to ideologues who would use the issue of priests marrying as a wedge to slip non-biblical teachings in the door. However, the same could have been said some 400 years ago about selling indulgences -- sure, selling indulgences is wrong but if we stop doing that then who knows what will happen?
Refusing to get rid of an unscriptural practice in case something worse might come in is like saying that it's better to keep on doing crack cocaine to keep from doing LSD.