Oh no, there's nothing wrong with it. Sorry, I was summarising the conclusions that "we" had arrived at (i.e. the point at which no one is left arguing - LOL!) and one of them is that there's no point risking so much of your work in one card. It's an "all your eggs in one basket" thing, that's all.
Even if you shoot in RAW, then 32Gb would be about 1,000 photos. You wouldn't want to risk losing all that work, even if you're a "spray 'n pray" kind of shooter. If you're taking video, that's around 90 minutes of HD video... in that time, you're going to have to restart shooting for the file size, and probably change the battery too, so why not also change the memory card? Smaller sizes are cheaper per gigabyte, and the manufacturing process has settled down, too.
Of course, you also want to be able to shoot away without worrying about running out of space, for the sake of a few dollars, so psychologically it may be important, but the general concensus seems to be that the 8Gb or 16Gb size is optimal right now.