I think it's important to differentiate something that is personally icky to you and something that is 'bad for humanity at large' unless you can demonstrate ho

I think it's important to differentiate something that is personally icky to you and something that is 'bad for humanity at large' unless you can demonstrate how it's bad for humanity at large and demonstrate why that makes it morally objectionable. Morally objectionable acts require (IMO) a victim. I think it's essential that before we decide that we are going to limit what people can do we determine if what they're doing is actually hurting someone to the extent that society should limit that behavior or if we're just limiting their behavior because it's different from ours and we don't like it. In my personal moral worldview, if a person can simulate a universe with no actual people in it in which they commit whatever debauchery they feel necessary without causing harm to anyone else, I say have fun. It has literally no measurable impact on me, so it would be immoral for me to insert my personal preferences into the matter.