[mmaunder]

Ezekiel 23:2–21 is CSAM by the same standard.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel%2023%3A...

Criminalizing fictional expression solely on the basis that it depicts sexual exploitation of a minor, absent any real victim, collapses a long-recognized legal distinction between depiction and abuse and renders the law impermissibly overbroad.

Canonical texts routinely protected and distributed in Australia, including religious and historical works such as the Book of Ezekiel, contain explicit descriptions of sexual abuse occurring “in youth,” employed for allegorical, condemnatory, or instructional purposes. These works are not proscribed precisely because courts recognize that context, intent, and literary function are essential limiting principles.

A standard that disregards those principles would not only criminalize private fictional prose but would logically extend to scripture, survivor memoirs, journalism, and historical documentation, thereby producing arbitrary enforcement and a profound chilling effect on lawful expression. Accordingly, absent a requirement of real-world harm or exploitative intent, such an application of child abuse material statutes exceeds their legitimate protective purpose and infringes foundational free expression principles.

[Markoff]

youth (15-24)/virginity/incest ≠ child abuse (CSAM)

I would even argue 15+ is age of consent in most of the western world, so having sex with 15yo is hardly an CSAM

[FrustratedMonky]

"so having sex with 15yo is hardly an CSAM"

Love it when the right moves the goal post. "Well actually, 15 is fine".

[Luker88]

Deuteronomy 22:28‑29, "young woman...of tender age". For Jewish tradition this means 12 year old, age at which the Jews once considered girls capable of marriage.

Lot daughters are also believed to be less than 15.

Famously also the prophet Mohammed consumed a marriage with a 9 year old, and that was seen as normal and approved by all previous text and tradition.

No age is ever explicitly defined for any case, because "csam" and "underage sex" just were not concepts people gave thought to.

Recognizing that some cases are probably fine by today's standard is fine, but refusing to recognize that at least some of them must have been way too young is ignoring a lot of evidence.