'Sense'
I expect you've seen the phrase "Bug.ger off" before, but I'm not going to attribute that, either.
The 'better to stop then land....' is almost certainly John Farley's but it's been so widely quoted that it's hardly necessary to quote names.
It's a real factor when it comes to landing on a ship or on a very short strip, however. It will become even more of a factor with the VAAC Harrier derived control system on JSF, which will allow VLs to be undertaken even more easily, and even more safely.
And you really should check your facts before posting bol.locks (I'm a journo, I'm allowed to). Your 'hazzard'ing a guess was completely awry. The F-35C is more expensive than the A or the C model (so I hope you're pleased that I'm willing to correct you, cos you are wrong). And then you need arrester gear and catapaults, a much heavier training burden, and a reduced ability to deploy normally land based units.
If we need carriers at all, STOVL makes better sense than either CTOL or STOBAR, though it does mean that we then have to buy JSF. If we did go STOBAR or CTOL, at least we could get a marinised Typhoon, Super Hornet or Rafale, and avoid the cluster that is JSF tech transfer.