That doesn’t detract from my point. If a person has a sexual shortcoming, he is not supposed to be pastor. If a person fails the sexual standards of the church, we are supposed to remove them from pastoralship.
You specifically referenced the Bible, claiming that it requires pastors to be married. Since the perpetrator at hand is married, your reference is irrelevant.
Your point - that persons with sexual shortcomings should not be a pastor - is correct, but your defense of it is faulty.
In any event, I would also take issue with your interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:2: This passage does not require a pastor to be married.
Indeed, Jesus was not married. (Were any of the original 12 Apostles married?)
Regards,