A call for participation, not a new regulation
The United Nations Alliance of Civilizations published remarks on September 24 by its high representative, Miguel Ángel Moratinos, for a Muslim World League side event in New York. The text identifies September 22 as the delivery date. Moratinos urged religious leaders and civil society to question whether AI protects dignity, truth, vulnerable people and human responsibility. He argued that access alone is an inadequate measure of inclusion.
The speech is an official statement of advocacy. It does not create binding requirements or establish that companies have accepted them. Nor should remarks delivered at a Muslim World League event be presented as a comprehensive statement of Islamic belief. The speaker represents a UN initiative; the host and speaker have distinct institutional roles. Read the published remarks: Source: unaoc.org
What meaningful inclusion would require
For a religious school or community organization, receiving a new tool is only the beginning of participation. A useful next question is whether people can understand and challenge the decisions made through it. Consider a hypothetical school buying an AI service: teachers might gain access while remaining unable to explain its recommendations to parents. Availability would have increased, but accountability would still need work.
Participation should therefore be assessed through practical questions. Can affected people raise a concern? Who must respond? Can they choose another route when a tool gives an unsuitable answer? These are our proposed tests of the principle, not measures evaluated by the speech. A public commitment becomes more useful when readers can identify the decision it changes.
Religious involvement also needs breadth. Inviting a prominent leader may open a conversation, but it cannot substitute for hearing families, minority communities and people who will use the service. No single interfaith event demonstrates agreement among all religious people.
Christian perspective: listen before speaking for others
James 2:1–9 challenges favoritism within the Christian assembly. Its concern is the unequal treatment of people, especially the preference shown to wealth and status. Applied cautiously to technology decisions, it asks Christians to examine whose experience is taken seriously. Read James 2 in NIV: James 2:1-9 (NIV)
A church participating in AI discussions can put that principle into practice by bringing specific accounts of need, asking permission before sharing personal experiences and reporting back to the people it claims to represent. Christian conviction does not require pretending that other traditions hold identical beliefs. It requires truthful representation and a willingness to hear people whose access, power and assumptions differ from our own.