(RNS) — As a humanist, David Durman believes in the importance of the human part of life. That means making his own decisions and making sure his work helps people flourish.
When the University of Kentucky, where the 45-year-old works as a research administrator, started asking employees to use AI in their workflow, he got worried. Durman felt he was being asked to offload his thinking to tools like Microsoft Teams Copilot, Claude and ChatGPT bots in his day-to-day work.
That felt like a violation of his beliefs, he said.
“The process and work involved in thinking through situations, through my work, through my ethics, through the way I handle other people, is a key component in being able to develop myself as a moral person,” he told RNS in a video interview. “And offloading that labor, regardless of whether it’s taxing or not, is undercutting my ability to be a moral actor.”
With the help of the American Humanist Association, he asked for an accommodation under Title VII, a federal law that allows employees to ask for a change in their work requirements to comply with religious belief.
In September, the university agreed and granted him a religious accommodation, meaning he does not have to use AI to complete his work.
Officials at the American Humanist Association believe it’s the first case of a humanist being granted an AI exemption.
“This is the first of its kind at the AHA and for humanism generally to exempt those who see AI use as flying in the face of their freedom of conscience,” Alexandria Huiskens, a staff attorney at the American Humanist Association, told RNS.
Durman’s case comes as religious leaders like Pope Leo XIV and Americans overall are expressing skepticism about AI.
A Washington Post-ABC News-IPOS poll released this week found that 57% of Americans said that AI is bad for society. And two-thirds oppose building the data centers needed to use AI.
In his encyclical, or papal teaching document, earlier this year, Pope Leo warned that AI could weaken democracy and human dignity. If misused, AI tools could also give added power to a few elites while leaving the rest of humanity behind, the pope wrote.
“When such power is concentrated in the hands of a few, it tends to become opaque and evade public oversight, increasing the risk of distorted forms of development that give rise to new dependencies, exclusions, manipulations and inequalities,” Leo wrote in “Magnifica Humanitas.”
Durman said he also worries AI could affect society in ways that are harmful. As a humanist, he believes in the importance of human flourishing. “At a societal level, I think that the use of AI technology runs counter to that,” he said.
His accommodation request was inspired in part by Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist software engineer who made headlines after receiving an exemption from her employer because of her religious concerns about AI.
After hearing about Maus’ case, Durman reached out to the American Humanist Association for help in requesting an accommodation of his own.
Huiskens helped Durman craft his letter requesting a religious accommodation under Title VII. She said AHA often gets requests for help with accommodations, but Durham’s request was especially compelling.
Federal courts have ruled that humanism qualifies as a religion. As a result, she said, humanists have the same rights as other faith groups under federal law.
“For us, humanism is a comprehensive way of life,” she said. “It’s built on inherent worth and dignity, and everyone should have room to exercise this comprehensive way of life at work the same way Christians do or Muslims do.”
Douglas Laycock, an emeritus law professor at the University of Virginia and the University of Texas, said requests for Title VII accommodations rely on whether a belief is sincere. Sometimes, he said, such as in cases involving requests for vaccine accommodations, it’s hard to tell whether a religious belief or political belief is at stake.
“It has to be a deeply held ethical commitment that’s analogous to a religious commitment,” he said. “That’s a fact question that presumably the employer will investigate.”
In his interview with RNS, Durman said that being a humanist means being present and paying attention to others. Using AI conflicts with that. He made a similar claim in his letter to the university.
“Substituting automated machine processing for human presence, authentic listening, and personal responsibility in my work directly conflicts with my obligation to uphold human dignity and flourishing as primary,” he wrote in a letter to the University of Kentucky’s Office of Equal Opportunity.
The letter cited Durman’s personal beliefs as well as the 2003 version of the Humanist Manifesto, which details humanist principles and beliefs. Those beliefs include the importance of freedom of conscience and human flourishing.
“We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility,” the manifesto reads.
Durman told RNS his work involves helping researchers at the university with grant applications and that he can do the work without the help of AI. And not using AI won’t affect his co-workers, he said.
At times, requests for such religious accommodations can wind up in court, such as a 2013 case involving a Muslim employee who wanted to wear a head covering at work or a 2023 Supreme Court decision in favor of a Christian postal worker who objected to working on Sundays.
For Durman, the accommodation process was much simpler. Durman sent the letter, and then he and Huiskens met with officials at the university.
“It was a very collegial meeting, and they found that there was no undue burden to David’s department,” Huiskens said. “They granted the accommodation promptly.”
In a letter dated Sept. 25, a manager in the OEO office said Durman’s request was granted. He will still be required to attend meetings or cooperate with other staff using AI.
“David may still be expected to participate in such meetings or be required to submit materials through such sites. David is excused from personal use of AI to complete his tasks,” wrote an OEO senior manager.
Durman said that many Americans are thinking through the implications of using AI — and that’s a good thing. He hopes that his example and those of others asking for accommodations will help others do the same.