I can think of several examples of this that I am OK with. The N-word appears twice in Gilbert and Sullivan‘s The Mikado. It was replaced in the recordings I listened to in the 1950s, and I am very glad it was. Even back then, essentially everyone knew it was offensive. I share Simon Dillon’s concerned about what he calls “moving the goalposts“ and I call “trigger creep”. But I think if something was found offensive in the 50s, we can be pretty sure there was no trigger creep involved. I feel the same way about removing offensive synonyms for “African-American” from Stephen Foster songs. I never heard the offensive versions when I was a kid, and I didn’t need to. I also can live with the idea that the Mikado shouldn’t be done in yellowface anymore, if the majority of east Asians are too upset by that. (But it does dull the essential joke of the Mikado, which is that the Japanese should not be exoticized, because they are actually “just like us” i.e. Victorian Brits. Seeing people in full Japanese costume singing a Madrigal is one of its funniest moments)

What I object to is the idea that a melody has picked up a kind of anti-woke cooties from having once had offensive lyrics. There are a lot of people, many of them education professionals, who seem to think this kind of censorship is not only acceptable but uncontroversially so. Similarly, Roald Dahl wrote a lot of stuff that was not racist or anti-semitic, and it’s just dumb to censor those writings because other things he wrote were offensive. Willy Wonka is supposed to be a bit creepy, and the racism behind his treatment of the Oompa-Loompas reinforces that creepiness, I think deliberately so.