In two posts on the subject, Does Sarah Palin present a Dilemna for Complementarians, part 1 and part 2, at Gender Blog, David Kotter succinctly addresses some of the questions over which I needed clarification.
Kotter begins the blog by saying,
The role of Gender Blog is not to provide a voter’s guide, but to help Christians to think biblically about a female vice presidential candidate. It is times like these that underscore the importance of looking to the Word of God as our guide in sorting through ever changing cultural and political situations.
In part 1 Kotter addresses that their are roles in the church and the home, but those do not seem to apply, according to the Bible, to the political sphere. He uses Esther as one example of that fact.
In part 2, Kotter begins by asking some of the questions that I have seen asked on the web,
It has been encouraging to have so many asking about how God’s design of manhood and womanhood and relates to serving in public office. In the midst of proliferating questions and commentaries, it seems there is confusion regarding the consistency of the complementarian position. It manifests itself in questions such as: Can a woman preside over the Senate but not teach a Bible study for men? Do complementarians really believe that a woman could lead a country but not a local church?
Kotter continues by making a distinction between the church and the political sphere, and the priority of the church and home over the civil government. Complementarians have a high view of women that allows them to be political leaders, while also limiting their leadership role in the church, according to biblical teaching.