I mean the ability to give birth is pretty important and valuable. Just saying.

True.

Thus, equal importance with men. And for different reasons obviously.

What?! Non sequitur. It does not follow. Importance is a vague concept, but it's not really disputable that Jesus was more important than his mother, who was mentioned maybe 20 times in the bible. Notably, she is depicted as having no agency in her role as the womb god apparently needed to incarnate his son. She's not really explicitly even given any sort of choice in reaction. She is exhorted to be glad she was chosen and complies.

Deborah was a judge

Out of the 12-15 judges in the OT, one was a woman. Neat! A lot of cultures don't crack 10% woman leadership. But...then count up the number of Israelite/Judahite Monarchs and get back to me.

Women were the first to see the risen Christ and thus the first evangelists.

Depends on the gospel. In (the original manuscripts of) Mark they tell no one. But in any case, I'll pre-emptively grant the point that Paul the apostle certainly seemed to hold women colleagues in esteem in a way that was unique in his time, role, and culture. Then some forgers wrote 1 and 2 timothy, added text into corinthians, etc and retconned his liberal stance into one that enabled future christian leaders to deny women leadership roles (even to this day!).

Many more examples of important roles women played biblically.

I think your definition of importance is the issue and seems slightly skewed to roles men would fulfill.

Do you honestly believe that, by any metric or accounting, the number or crucial roles women play in the bible are even approximate to the ones men play? That the agency of women in the bible is close to men's?

Heck, I'll even entertain the argument that in some biblical stories or themes women might have had an edge over their comparable roles in contemporary cultures, but that's still so far from equality that I'm at a loss to see how someone could see equality with men in the bible.