The article itself explains the censorship angle: "I almost wonder if this is a product of the kind of guardrails they’ve had to put on these tools so that they

The article itself explains the censorship angle: "I almost wonder if this is a product of the kind of guardrails they’ve had to put on these tools so that they’re not offensive; maybe, somehow, their parameters suggest that it would be offensive to portray Jesus in a subservient position" There are many, many situations where depicting a famous historical figure in a degrading, subservient act would be inflammatory or offensive. In fact, that's probably the default situation, imagine the reaction to any of the following images: The prophet Mohammad cleaning a toilet. Martin Luther King Jr shining a shoe. Mahatma Ghandi giving a massage to a British officer. The unique or novel aspect of Christian lore, is that that was the whole point. Jesus famously washed the feet of "lesser" people, despite being the son of God, as a parable to teach the lesson that privileged, powerful and important people should dedicate themselves to service to the less fortunate. The interesting situation here is an AI guardrail against "Don't show an important historical leader doing a degrading act" going against "this particular leader, did this degrading act as a central dogma lesson to his followers, and it has been a central part of writing and art about them for centuries thereafter"