If they both get profitable mining with GPUs will produce less in terms of net profit unless if the price volatility ends up taking the price waaaay higher.

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Litecoin is the perfect mining complement to Bitcoin mining. I don't how much rigs are in operation in the world, but each of them have a CPU that's currently idle while the GPU works. Since doing GPU-mining is more profitable and logical with BTC, even if the option is possible with LTC, it's not an interesting option. But since CPU are viable for LTC, all those idle CPU from those rigs can be used to mine LTC. I get around 80KH with my CPUs to mine LTC, I think it's pretty good when you consider the alternative is idle CPU.

If your electricity is free, then yes. OTHERWISE, you're better off taking the money you'd spend on the extra electricity cost of running your CPU at 100%, and buying the LTC that way.

Just some math:

My 2600k eats 100w over idle when mining LTC. That's 2.4 KWrhs per day, and at $0.1KWhr that's $0.24 per day. Not very much.

I mine at just under 60 Kh/s, which right now would give you about 60 LTC/day

That's $0.004 per LTC if you mine.

LTC is trading for $0.0025 right now.

I agree with this...but then again adding hashing power to the network helps secure it (even as small as it is now)

Just for the sake of clarity, it is possible to change the algorithm without restarting the chain, it just takes some coding.
The real problem would be devising a hashing algorithm that is more GPU-hostile and ASIC-hostile than scrypt and that is at the same time immune to cryptographic attacks.

That thread refers to a well-established network. Litecoin is nowhere as widespread as Bitcoin, and "political" issues are considerably less complicated.
A mandatory protocol upgrade would of course create a split in the blockchain, but if the transition is carefully planned (so that all the pools and the majority of users all agree on the changes and upgrade their software accordingly) I think there should be no major problem.

As I stated before, however, I don't think that's where the real problem lies.

I would be okay with this as well. I still think there is a strong argument for the 'silver' to BTC 'gold'. I wouldn't be surprised if BTC ends up being so successful that the 21 million limit in coins turns out to look rather small. Yes of course it's divisible down many decimal places, but if people really end up using it for millions if not billions of transactions, people are going to have a hard time keeping track of how many 0's they have to put in their transactions.

Additionally, I think it means people can keep mining for much longer. LTC comes at a time when BTC is already much farther along. With BTC a great number of coins were mined prior to many people knowing about it and as a result it's complicated to mine now once it's really starting to hit it's stride. I posted before how 'ownership' is an important characteristic of LTC and I think it holds true still. People jumping on LTC and mining with all sorts of processors will help it greatly in the long run.