:Seablade, you have made accusation of POV but, unfortunately, the problem is you have walked into this not assumming good faith yourself to start with. The fact that an article gives equal weight to each side, is not a position of POV at all - on the contrary.  Quite frankly, and since the article quite abundantly already presented all the various political sides, you are attempting to push greater content for one single side simply because, as you claim, it is the majority. No offense but, other than stating in the body of the article that a certain one side represents the majority, your "majortity" argument is flawed: Controversies don't have to be defended in equal numbers by the sides that represent them in order to be, well, controversies. Unless you can present a better argument than you have so far presented (and please, kindly, spare me the thousand-word long quotations in the future), I will proceed to restoring the edits that represent the controversy. As I said before, I am not interested in using this page for political discussions, but for those discussions that will enhance the article itself. My name is   , and I approve this message.