---
title: "Secular Humanist in the US Granted Official Right Not to Use AI at Work: The University of Kentucky Precedent"
description: "University of Kentucky administrator David Durman has become the first secular humanist to officially receive a religious exemption from using AI in the workplace. Legal support was provided by the American Humanist Association."
date: 2026-10-30T15:43:13.861Z
lang: en
url: https://xab.info/en/posts/secular-humanist-right-not-to-use-ai-workplace-precedent
tags: [ai, secular-humanism, university-of-kentucky, labor-rights, artificial-intelligence, usa]
author: "Alexander Buran"
publisher: "XAB.info"
---

# Secular Humanist in the US Granted Official Right Not to Use AI at Work: The University of Kentucky Precedent

![Man in a suit gesturing towards a robot holding a laptop in a lecture hall](https://xab.info/media/2026/10/30/svetskij-gumanist-prav-ne-ispolzovat-ii-rabota-precendent/svetskij-gumanist-prav-ne-ispolzovat-ii-rabota-precendent-1.webp)

## Key Points

- David Durman is the first secular humanist to receive an official religious exemption from using AI at work in the US
- The legal processing of the exemption was carried out by the American Humanist Association
- The University of Kentucky reviews such requests individually, taking job duties into account
- Engineer Erin Mouse previously achieved similar conditions, but Durman's case became the first public precedent

University of Kentucky administrator David Durman has become the first secular humanist in the United States to be officially granted a religious exemption from the mandatory use of artificial intelligence tools in the workplace. This is reported by RBC-Ukraine, citing the American Humanist Association (AHA). According to legal experts, this case establishes one of the first public precedents in which a secular worldview is equated with a religious belief under U.S. labor law.

### Arguments Against Algorithms: From Moral Agent to Ecology

David Durman justifies his position by arguing that over-reliance on algorithms "dulls a person's ability to be a moral agent." According to him, artificial intelligence "hampers people's ability to earn a living, causes ecological damage to the planet, and appropriates human creativity in the fields of art and literature." These very considerations served as the basis for appealing to the American Humanist Association, whose lawyers helped Durman secure an exemption from the mandatory use of AI tools within his job duties.

### How the University Responded to the Request

University of Kentucky spokesperson Jay Blanton stated that the institution reviews requests for religious accommodations on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific job duties of employees. In Durman's case, management decided that granting the exemption would not prevent him from performing his core function—assisting researchers with grant proposals. Notably, Durman decided to seek legal protection in advance, despite recommendations from colleagues and management to try out the new tools.

### Not the First, But the First Public One: The Precedent Context

Although Durman's case has become one of the first public precedents of its kind, software engineer Erin Mouse previously secured similar conditions. Thus, the practice of granting secular humanists exemptions from AI obligations had already taken place, but it is Durman's case that gained widespread resonance thanks to AHA's support and the university's public stance. Representatives of the association emphasize that concern over the impact of artificial intelligence on human dignity is inherent in various beliefs and worldviews: "The laws protect not only traditional religious beliefs, but also secular humanist convictions," they explain.

### What This Means for Labor Law and AI Ethics

Durman himself notes that he is not trying to impose his own opinion on other employees, but hopes his example will inspire people to stand up for their ethical positions in the workplace. The University of Kentucky precedent opens a discussion on where the line lies between the corporate demand to implement new technologies and an employee's right to protect deeply held convictions. At a time when AI tools are becoming standard across many industries by October 2026, the question of whether one can opt out of using them on grounds of conscience ceases to be hypothetical and gains legal concreteness.

## Fact-Check & Sources

- [Исторический прецедент: работник университета получил право отказаться от ИИ](https://www.rbc.ua/ukr/news/istorichniy-pretsedent-pratsivnik-universitetu-1793370127.html) - The source text contains all key facts: Durman's name, position, AHA's stance, university spokesperson Jay Blanton's statement, and the mention of Erin Mouse. There are no discrepancies with the baseline.

## FAQ

### Who is David Durman and what position does he hold?

David Durman is an administrator at the University of Kentucky. His primary function includes, in particular, assisting researchers with preparing grant proposals.

### What exactly does a 'religious exemption' mean in this case?

It is a legally formalized exception from the mandatory use of artificial intelligence tools in the workplace. The American Humanist Association helped Durman secure it as protection for a secular humanist belief equated to religion under labor law.

### Is Durman's case the first in history?

It is the first public precedent for a secular humanist. Software engineer Erin Mouse previously achieved similar terms, but her case did not receive such widespread public resonance.

### How does the University of Kentucky view such requests?

University spokesperson Jay Blanton stated that the institution reviews religious accommodation requests individually, considering employees' job duties. In Durman's case, management felt the exemption would not interfere with his work tasks.