Many of us leave our beers in primary for a month then bottle. I find my beer is clearer and cleaner tasting and has consistantly scored higher in contest as compared to when I used a secondary.
I suggest you read THIS thread, it's become the "uber discussion" on this topic thread.
To Secondary or Not? John Palmer and Jamil Zainasheff Weigh In .
Most everyone on this forum has ventured their opinions on the subject many many many many many many many many many many times, and most of them have ended up in the above thread. If you really do want opinions, and even some facts and citations, and articles, podcasts and other things on this topic, hit that thread, then make up your own mind.
You'll find that more and more recipes these days do not advocate moving to a secondary at all, but mention primary for a month, which is starting to reflect the shift in brewing culture that has occurred in the last 4 years, MOSTLY because of many of us on here, skipping secondary, opting for longer primaries, and writing about it. Recipes in BYO have begun stating that in their magazine. I remember the "scandal" it caused i the letters to the editor's section a month later, it was just like how it was here when we began discussing it, except a lot more civil than it was here. But after the Byo/Basic brewing experiment, they started reflecting it in their recipes.
Fermenting the beer is just a part of what the yeast do. If you leave the beer alone, they will go back and clean up the byproducts of fermentation that often lead to off flavors. That's why many brewers skip secondary and leave our beers alone in primary for a month. It leaves plenty of time for the yeast to ferment, clean up after themselves and then fall out, leaving our beers crystal clear, with a tight yeast cake.