This entire emotional/passionate debate of how to categorize Pluto, could be completely done away with, and finally SOLVED, if only we followed the same categorization-philosophy that we use for stars.
When it comes to stars, we have a very DIVERSE large/array of types of stellar categories.
In fact the diversity of types of stars that we talk about, vastly exceeds the diversity of types of planetary-like worlds and moons in our solar system.
And yet, we don't argue, or get all hung up, or have difficulty/issues about agreeing, at the end of the day, that those objects are ALL stars. They're just different types of stars.
So we can't we say the same about Pluto? Why can't we just agree that it's a planet, but a different type of planet, and be done with this pointless debate!?
Firstly, the BIGGEST argument against trying to claim that Pluto is not a planet, is the fact that if you were to move Earth, to Pluto's orbital position around the sun, then suddenly the Earth would no longer be classified as a planet either, as it could no longer fit all the criteria, at that orbital position.
If not even Earth (our prime example of a planet) can meet the definition of a planet, at Pluto's orbit, then obviously that is a pretty glaring sign there is something WRONG with the definition.
But let's go back to looking at the stars... particularly our nearest stellar neighbor Alpha Centauri.
It's a triple star system.
You have 2 "large" stars orbiting each other at the center. And then way out, you have a much SMALLER star, a red-dwarf, orbiting the binary pair.
Just because Alpha-Centauri's red-dwarf is so much SMALLER than the other 2 stars in that system... and just because it seems to act more like a planet, in terms of it's orbital behavior, doesn't mean that we stop calling it a star, and downgrade it to a "planet".
AGAIN:
Alpha Centauri's red dwarf companion is not a planet. It's a star. Doesn't matter that it's so tiny (especially if you compare it to the larger stars)... doesn't matter that it seems to act more like a planet in it's orbital behavior... it's a STAR!
In fact the diversity and range of different types of stars, vastly exceeds the different ranges/types of worlds in our solar system.
And yet, with all the difference in behavior, most of us do not have issues or problems, or want to argue about whether a star is a star.
So in conclusion I would argue that Pluto is a PLANET. It's a smaller planet, but a planet nevertheless.
Ceres is a planet.
Sedna is a planet.
Our moon is a planet (making us a double planet system).
Titan is a planet (that happens to orbit another planet - Saturn - just as some stars happen to orbit other stars).
Heck, some planets (perhaps most planets?) don't even orbit a star or another planet... instead they just fly free at high speeds through interstellar space, as "Rogue-Planets", ejected from their birth-system.
If it's round and spherical, and is fairly large, and doesn't conduct nuclear fusion throughout it's body, then it is a friggin PLANET!