A humanist wins a religious exemption from using AI at work

David Durman is a research administrator at the University of Kentucky. In plain words, his job is to help researchers apply for grants, which are pots of money that pay for research.

He recently secured a religious accommodation from using AI in the workplace. An accommodation is a change to your job duties that your employer agrees to so you can follow your beliefs. According to Tom's Hardware, which cites Religion News Service (RNS), the university approved it under Title VII.

The American Humanist Association (AHA) helped him. The AHA is a nonprofit that advances secular humanism, a way of living built around human well-being rather than a god.

Durman described it this way to TechCrunch: "Humanism is a collection of beliefs about the human experience and how humans interact with the world." It centers on "human well-being and flourishing," both for each person and for everyone together.

Humanism is not anti-religious. TechCrunch says it tends to appeal to people who doubt a god or any supernatural power but still want a scientific and moral framework to live by.

That raises a fair question: how can a non-religious belief earn a religious exemption? Tom's Hardware and TechRadar both point to the same answer. Federal courts have ruled that humanism can be treated as a religion.

Title VII is part of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It bans employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.

It also lets workers ask for an accommodation when a job requirement clashes with their religious beliefs. The AHA's staff attorney, Alexandria Huiskens, told RNS: "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."

In real life Think of the way an employer might change a schedule so someone can observe a day of rest. This is the same kind of request, except the thing being avoided is a chatbot, not a Saturday shift.

Durman says using AI would mean handing off his thinking. He told RNS he worries about tools like ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot (Microsoft's AI assistant built into work apps).

His reasoning is about character: "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 added: "And offloading that labor, regardless of whether it's taxing or not, is undercutting my ability to be a moral actor."

He also spoke about wider concerns. In a statement published by the AHA, he wrote that AI is interfering with people's ability to earn a living. He also pointed to environmental costs and to what he called the theft of human creativity.

It is narrower than the headlines may suggest. The key details, as reported by Tom's Hardware and TechRadar:

• What he is excused from: personally using AI tools for his tasks.
• What he still does: attends meetings and cooperates with colleagues who use AI.
• Also still required: submitting materials to AI tools, as needed.

TechCrunch adds an important detail about timing. In his administrative role, Durman has not actually been required to use AI. Some colleagues and leaders have recommended trying the tools, so he sought the accommodation now, in case a suggestion turns into a mandate later.

The exemption protects him from a possible future rule, not from a rule that already existed.

University of Kentucky spokesperson Jay Blanton told TechCrunch that the school reviews religious accommodation requests on an individual basis. It looks at the employee's job responsibilities and the circumstances of the request.

"In this case, the university determined that an accommodation could be provided while allowing the employee to continue performing the essential functions of their position," Blanton said. He also noted that as technology and job duties change, accommodations may be reviewed to make sure they stay reasonable and workable.

So the arrangement is not permanent by default. It can be revisited if his job changes.

The AHA says it is the first of its kind for humanism. It is not the first AI exemption that has been talked about in public.

TechCrunch says Durman was inspired by Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist and software engineer who secured similar protections. InfoWorld, summarizing a Business Insider report, says Maus is based in North Carolina. She used Pope Leo XIV's message about being careful with AI, from his encyclical (a formal letter from the pope) called Magnifica Humanitas, to make her case.

Maus is not Catholic, according to the same report. She reportedly consulted an employment lawyer and her local minister. Her wishes were granted, and she said: "I'm writing my code and reviewing my code by hand, which seems crazy to say."

TechCrunch notes that her situation is especially unusual, because it has become rare for software engineers to write code without AI help. It also says Pope Leo XIV has decried AI as a threat to human dignity.

No, and the outlets are clear about the limits.

The catch: Tom's Hardware explains that anyone can ask for a Title VII accommodation, but it is granted only if the applicant holds a deep moral conviction that could count as an article of faith. The law also says the request must not place an "undue hardship" on the employer's business. That means a cost or burden that is too big for the company.

TechRadar quotes Douglas Laycock, an emeritus law professor at the University of Virginia and the University of Texas. He noted that your stated beliefs have to be sincere. You cannot pick a religion and say AI use breaks its rules if you do not actually follow that belief system.

TechRadar also puts the point lightly: this is not a quick ticket out of AI workflows for everyone.

Tom's Hardware gives some context. It says about half of US employees now use AI in some way at work. It also cites reports that corporate America, apart from Big Tech, is not yet seeing financial returns from it, and that many executives remain unsure about the return on their AI spending.

As more employers encourage or require AI use, more workers may ask what their rights are. State lawmakers are already looking at workplace AI, and our story on California's "No Robo Bosses" bill shows one example.

Durman himself does not present this as a recipe for everyone. "For me, this was about me and my convictions," he told TechCrunch. "I'm obviously not trying to tell people how to think or feel." He hopes it encourages people with similar concerns to pursue them in whatever way feels most appropriate, "not necessarily religious exemption."

• If your employer pushes AI, you may be able to ask for an accommodation, but it must rest on sincerely held beliefs, not simple dislike of a tool.
• Expect limits. Durman still joins AI-assisted meetings and submits materials to AI tools when needed.
• Employers may review it. The University of Kentucky says accommodations can change as jobs and technology change.
• Talk to a professional first. Durman and Maus both worked with advisers, an AHA attorney in his case and an employment lawyer in hers.