Why does using AI-writing get judged differently than using any tool for literally anything else?

Nobody questions someone's competence for using a calculator, a spellchecker, a design template, or an IDE autocomplete. Using a tool to help execute an idea is normal everywhere else.

But the second writing involves AI even when the person had the actual idea and used AI just to help draft or refine it there's an instant judgment that doesn't apply anywhere else.

Genuinely curious what people think: is this really about output quality, or is it more about who gets credit for the thinking behind it? Feels like there's a real inconsistency here that most people haven't quite named.