Recent debates on generative artificial intelligence (AI) in qualitative research have been framed in increasingly polarized terms, positioning researchers as uncritical adopters or principled refusers. Drawing on recent position statements and editorial guidance, this article argues that such binary framing is unhelpful. While endorsing core concerns about meaning-making, reflexivity, bias, and environmental harm, it suggests that these concerns do not justify categorical rejection of all AI use. Instead, the article proposes refocusing debate on epistemic authority, distinguishing AI-led analysis from human-led practices, and developing governance-oriented responses to ethical and environmental risks. Moving beyond moral binaries is essential to preserving reflexive qualitative inquiry.