My dad practiced law for 50+ years before his retirement, he has served on several juries - civil and criminal. And one of our local federal judges, Judge Evans, served on an armed robbery trial awhile back. Nobody seemed to mind. If anything, I think a fair-minded lawyer would bend over backwards to follow the judge's instructions and require the correct burden of proof.
It's more important to strike the kooks, the prejudiced, and the self-important know-it-alls from the jury. Of course, those categories often overlap when you're talking about lawyers . . . :-D . . . but I wouldn't strike a lawyer on voir dire if he seemed like a sensible fellow.
I have no problem with anything you've said. I think a jury should be a representative cross-section of the community as nearly as possible and without going overboard. If an unbiased jury is unlikely to be empanelled, then trial venue should be changed.