No offense intended, as I'm merely pointing out what appears to be a mis-prioritization and inconsistency (from a conservative evangelical/fundamental perspective) of principles in your thinking, as well as conflating distinctions that are worth differentiating (like ministry leadership vs "laity"). The most recent evidence of that I'd point to is your answer to Tarheel. He points to the reality that PCC is standing on the Biblical principle that an openly licentious lifestyle is cause to disassociate or disfellowship from the offending party, whereas you resort to the Legal rationale for supporting why you believe that PCC should kowtow to the ethics of secular culture. The singing group in question made it clear with their response to the situation that they would have hoped to continue the relationship despite PCCs religious objections. Their stated reason for maintaining the ongoing relationship was so that The Kings singers/folk could foster a sense of "inclusion". Their intent is clear, that they don't see a problem with the lifestyle, and that is their legal prerogative, but it clashes with PCC's legal AND moral rights based on an informed Biblical consciousness and conscience.
The joke about your politics and ecclesiology wasn't meant to offend, and if I did so I apologize.