Lsmith-
<font color="blue">...I had no idea that it borders on religion for some. </font>
Yes, yes it does. And just like in religion, there are a bunch of different schools of thought. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
A couple of thoughts and questions to follow up on your latest post...
<font color="blue">I am leaning toward a rifle that shoots a .357 or .44 round </font>
Although I could see going with the .44 (more on that in a sec.), I'd suggest not going with the .357 as your primary varmint/hog gun. While again, a well placed shot from just about any cartridge will bring down a hog, .357 (even with the extra velocity/energy coming out of a rifle barrel) is going to be way to light in my book. The reason I say this is because a .357 in a (with roughly equivalent bullet weight) will only have about 70% the velocity and less than 50% the energy of a comparable round in .30-30.
The .44 Mag, depending on bullet weight, can actually outperform the .30-30 with regards to energy - hence it is a much better choice over the .357. You still have the rapid fall off in velocity/energy with the .44 (i.e. limited range), but again, compared to the .357, it is the better choice. Don't take my comments as negative criticisms of the .357 or .44 Mag (I shoot both) - just trying to point out some of the characteristics with regards to these cartridges and how they may/may not fit your intended uses.
<font color="blue">Range is probably not as important as stopping power. </font>
Depending on the cartridge you select you can improve both aspects at the same time. Other "big bore" cartridges available in a lever gun are the .444 Marlin and the .45-70. Both have considerably more energy and velocity than the .44 Mag (even when .44 Mag is shot from a rifle. (i.e. .44Mag < .444Marlin < .45-70)
Now, you won't find either of those cartridges in a revolver or such (well, except for the BFR but that's a whole different conversation), but if you want more energy & velocity (i.e. "Stopping power"), they both are considerably more powerful than the .44 Mag. and both will extend the useful range at which you can shoot. The down sides to them are that because they are big, fat bullets going at relatively low velocities (compared to other rifle cartridges others have suggested), they are going to slow down faster once fired and will have a greater "drop" over a given distance (i.e. you'll have a much more pronounced arc of the bullet path that you’ll have to compensate for with regards to aiming at your target.) Additionally, neither are known as “long range” cartridges. Other tradeoffs both of these cartridges have with regards to the .44 Mag include the increased recoil (substantial) and generally higher ammo costs.
I guess one of the questions I have is what type of range do you plan/want to shoot at/up to? I know initially you were talking about "reaching out and touching them" - but it now sounds like you are thinking that you'll be shooting closer in than you were first thinking. If you have an idea with regards to how many yards you'll be shooting at/up to, it may help focus the conversation a bit more.
I guess one other thing to think about is how much you want to approach your purchase from the "tool" side vs. the "desire" side. In other words, you could go completely "tool" and get something that would meet all (or most all) of the criteria you set out (range, accuracy, cost, etc.) but it probably wouldn't meet all your desires with regards to other less functional aspects.
For example, I personally like the look of wood stocks much better than synthetic - but there are inherent problems with wood stocks - problems I'm willing to put up with due to my personal taste. Something that you mention that sounds similar would be the potential practical range of the rifle vs. having pistol/rifle cartridge interchangeability. There's no "right" answer here - just something to think about and prioritize.
