University of Kentucky grants employee AI opt-out over humanist beliefs

David Durman can keep doing his University of Kentucky job without personally using AI. The research administrator received an accommodation based on his humanist beliefs on September 25, 2026, according to an October 26 announcement by the American Humanist Association. His objection centers on personal moral responsibility—not simply whether the tools produce useful work.

The association helped Durman request the accommodation from the university’s Office of Equal Opportunity. It says the office approved it after determining that the arrangement posed no undue burden on his department. Durman continues to perform all his job duties without using AI, the association says.

An objection to outsourcing thought

Durman’s argument treats thinking as part of his ethical obligations, rather than a task he can freely delegate. Speaking to Religion News Service, he described working through situations, ethical questions and relationships as essential to developing himself as a moral person. Tom’s Hardware reproduced his explanation: “And offloading that labor, regardless of whether it’s taxing or not, is undercutting my ability to be a moral actor.”

In the association’s announcement, Durman also tied his refusal to concerns about livelihoods, environmental costs and human creativity. Those are his stated reasons for viewing generative AI and large language models as contrary to human wellbeing. He said his beliefs require him to take personal responsibility for the morality of his actions.

His request letter made that objection specific to his work. As quoted by Gizmodo, it said substituting automated processing for human presence, authentic listening and personal responsibility conflicted with his obligation to uphold human dignity and flourishing. The request therefore concerned how he carries out his responsibilities, not a demand to remove AI from the university.

Religious protection without belief in a god

The legal route was a religious accommodation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. AHA staff attorney Alexandria Huiskens said comprehensive belief systems without a god, including humanism, are entitled to the same religious protections as traditional religions. The association describes humanism as a worldview focused on informed, meaningful lives and the greater good of humanity, without belief in gods or supernatural forces.

That does not make refusing AI a shared requirement for humanists. AHA explicitly says humanists hold different views about how to act on concerns over the technology. Its position is that each person should be able to follow their conscience, rather than that every humanist must reach Durman’s conclusion.

Huiskens told Religion News Service that the exemption was the first of its kind for AHA and humanism generally, according to Tom’s Hardware. That claim is narrower than the first religious workplace AI exemption: Gizmodo cited an earlier accommodation for software engineer Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist.

Personal refusal, continued collaboration

The accommodation’s limits draw a practical distinction between Durman’s own use and other people’s work. He must still attend meetings and cooperate with colleagues who use AI. Tom’s Hardware also reported that he may still be asked to submit materials to AI tools as needed. His personal exemption does not create an AI-free working environment.