Concept ACK.
I support removing arbitrary limits on Core. Sometime, people need to acknowledge that the nature of Bitcoin is to be a permissionless network, where information can be embedded in many forms, and trying to stifle all of them creates more problems than it solves. For example, the Ordinals could be implemented far more efficiently if certain limits were removed, than by bloating the chain with UTXO dust that will remain unspent forever.
Also, the true reason why people oppose these proposals is because they don't want to see fees skyrocket. They don't care what's being added in the chain, just as they don't care for every other transaction that is not "data-only". Opposing the free market from finding innovative and efficient ways to make use of Bitcoin is contrary to the spirit of Bitcoin, and raises concern for the security budget problem. The more obstacles we place to the way information can be spread, the more we push ourselves towards declining on-chain usage.
The demand to store and move money from A to B will always be there and will be increased in the future as governments remove physical cash, then you will see an organic demand for the monetary usage in the form of more transactions, which is more important than storing arbitrary crap on the blockchain. The network needs to be ready for the monetary usage for when that demand happens. If you add more complexity, you add a higher risk that something goes wrong. Who cares about Ordinals or anything else but storing money and moving it around, and guarantee that it remains there 20, 50, 100 years from now. The way you do this is the opposite of adding things that have another goal beyond the monetary usage.