You can't even begin to compare that with the Ordinals Attack that is both exploiting the protocol and injecting as much data as they can into the blocks with basically no limit apart from the block size.
There are nearly infinite ways to inject arbitrary data to the chain. Doing so only pushes Ordinal fans to adopt another encoding scheme, putting Bitcoin principles at risk. As I have already said, they can even represent Ordinals as indistinguishable Bitcoin transactions, and at that point you will have made things worse, because then we'll have to keep these trash outputs in the UTXO set forever.
What you are forgetting is that we've already done all of that!
We have never censored a type of transaction because of denial to accept it fits our Bitcoin standards.
There is a limit on everything to keep spams like Ordinals out. It has been like this forever. OP_RETURN size is limited.
Reusing OP_RETURN is not. Yes, you can put up to 10,000 bytes in an OP_RETURN output, if I'm not mistaken, but nothing prevents you from re-doing it, essentially injecting as much data as you want.
Every output size is also limited to standard outputs (P2PKH, P2SH, etc.) witness sizes (for version 0) are limited, stack item sizes are limited, transaction sizes used to be limited, and a lot more that I have iterated too many times in this topic!
A protocol change is beyond standardness. Let's not kid ourselves, you want Ordinals invalid, not non-standard.
Nobody has ever complained about preventing spam for 14 years until the Ordinals Attack appeared which is pretty weird to me if I'm honest with you.
And nobody ever complained about using Bitcoin beyond as currency. From the very early days, we had
NFTs. Now, someone wants to take advantage of censorship-resistant cloud storage, who am I to tell him what to do with that money; especially when there is no manner to prevent him.