Yes, they are. Ever tried writing a Slavic language in Korean script? Pain in the ass because Slavic languages don't work with a simple CVC (consonant-vowel-consonant) syllable structure. Ever tried writing Slavic language in abjad such as Persian-Arabic script? Pain in the ass because vowels are very important in Slavic languages. I'm not saying it doesn't work (look at Arebica which was used for Bosnian) but it's just a plain pain in the ass to take the script, rework it and try to teach/force the people so they would use it.

I [size=12pt]knew[/size] you'd mention this, I just didn't want to go too far into detail. I was going to just write 'any other Alphabet', but wrote writing system instead, sounded nicer. So that's that.

From a linguistical POV, Venedic runes (or črty i rězy, as you wish) weren't as accustomed to the Slavic nature and phonology of the Proto-Slavic as Glagolitic/Cyrillic (or even Latin) are – as presented on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Venedic_runes.jpg – have in total 18 symbols. If, I mean IF those symbols stand for particular phonemes (the smallest unit of speech which can discern the meanings of the words), 18 of them is not sufficient because Proto-Slavic had more than 18 phonemes (the actual number of phonemes, as far as I remember, is about 35 consonants and 11 vowels=46 not counting the diphthongs). Even if the Venedic runes were used only for consonants, 18 symbols is still too low.

I'm not talking about venedic runes. Actually, this is the first time I've heard of them. Wasn't it clear what I was talking about?

Yes I know a good script which stands the test of time takes ages to develop but…If the Venedic runes were in their early stages of development before Glagolitic/Cyrillic came, then Slavs were lucky – they didn't need to develop a whole new scrip in order to write the language down because the work has been already done for them. If the script was in its late stages of development, then it just sucks they couldn't make it.

Again, not talking about these 'venedic runes.' I haven't read much about them as of yet, but they seem silly.

Can you tell me more about them? are the sources on them historically accurate? It just seems a bit made up is all.

There was no script. Very early pictographs to mark things,  and tallies for keeping count. Strokes and incisions. Tallies, and sketches. (I explained this in the previous post)

I don't need to remind you that (at least from what I've read in Slované by Magdalena Beranová) Slavs willingly CHOSE to accept the scripts. There was no force. Noone forced them to use Glagolitic/Cyrillic/Latin. They could continue the development of the Venedic runes. They could have no script at all. But yet they chose to accept Glagolitic/Cyrillic/Latin. So no, Venedic runes did were given a fair go.

Again, there was no writing system. There was but a foundation in the form of various symbols. So of course they accepted it.

Oh yeah, our culture, our religion, our language, our script, our territory, our people, our politics, our literature. What comes next? Our ideology? I just want to say that foreign influences aren't anything bad we Slavs should avoid. Afterall, I consider Glagolitic and Cyrillic OUR. Those two are OUR because no other script can record the Slavic languages better. I heard that they were even made to suit the Old Church Slavonic.

In this time and age, foreign influence on any part of Slavic culture needs to be avoided like the plague.[size=12pt] More so,[/size] in fact.
They're ours because we've made them ours. They've been accepted and the problem of their foreignness no longer presents itself to the mind.
Just like various Turkish loan words are 'ours'.