Photography as an art

I guess after reading the controversy over whether or not photography should be considered an art or not, I have come to the conclusion that photography is what it is. Maybe it should just be considered its own art. I don't really understand why it has to be debated over and over, and compared to the realm of painting and drawing. I agree with Lady Elizabeth Eastlake when she stated that "Photography was not an art but emphasized this as its strength." I guess this is often how I view photography. I do think that it is an art, but it is so different from painting and drawing that, I often consider it its own kind of art.
I understand that back when photography first came about there was a lot of debating between whether or not it should be considered an art, and whether or not we could find truth in a photograph. But, I think this should be the controversy now, not in the 1800's and 1900's. Of course manipulation of an image was very possible back then, it was much more complicated and difficult. With today's technology, this is where I can see the questioning of whether or not a photograph is truthful. So many people have digital camera's and so many know how to use Photoshop, this to me takes away from Photographer's, who understand and appreciate the "Art of Photography." I think that critics that argue about the truthfulness of photographs should consider that photography is one of the main aspects of history. Without photographs we would have to rely artifacts and ansestors passing down stories of history. In my opinion, I'll take my chances trusting a photograph versus hundreds of old, stretched, and embellished stories.