Let's set something straight now. I will not accept an argument that a person is bad or good because of their ability to form a conviction to one side of an issue and not waver from it. IT'S BAD IF THAT STANCE TURNS OUT TO BE WRONG!

How much nicer history would have been had Hitler realized, a few years into his formulation of the plan for the eradication of the Jews, that maybe it was not a moral and ethical thing to do.

The fields of Little Big Horn would've been a bit greener that day had Custer listened to the voices of reason around him and not charged headstrong into his undoing.

Maybe Titanic would be sitting next to the Queen Mary today in Long Beach as a tourist destination instead of rotting in a watery grave if Capt. Smith had changed his committment to speed over safety for that evening.

There are countless examples on both sides of the coin (I'll probably regret giving an inch here) of the right and wrong of strongly committed decisions throughout history. There are also times when changing of the mind, waffling or simply counting to 10 prior to acting have resulted in both good and bad results.

Unwavering committment to a cause is a double-edged sword. It can both be a tremendous strength as well as an Achille's Heel. It's value is as fleeting as one's own personal religious belief, a concept only tested after the fact. None of us have professed a psychic ability to see into the future so let's let this issue end now. Attack individual issues if you must but it's laughable to put any emphasis on what path that person took to come to that conclusion or how they'll feel about it a year from now.