That doesn't mean it was intended to split the network. They intended for everyone to update to the fork. That code was included in case not enough hashpower updated before the DAO attacker could move his funds. This is similar to Mike Hearn's "checkpointing" in XT -- in case XT became the minority chain, keep the rules intact.

Are you saying consensus rule changes should be decided by "orphaning"? How would that even work? The reason a network split occurs in a hard fork is because users haven't updated, and so some miners return to that chain. Those users won't even see the rule-breaking chain no matter how long it is.