By questioning your school’s commitment to giving its students diversity training, even on the grounds that it’s not an academic subject, and not what they’re paying for, you have now identified yourself as a conservative (for only conservatives say things like that), and a word of caution is in order.  Never underestimate the depth of the hatred underlying the kind of liberalism you are encountering, for your question is not to the liberal merely academic, but personal, and what may appear a minor curricular matter on the surface has roots in, and resonates down to, a condemnation of the person that the liberal knows is both true and authoritative.

 

Take abortion, for example: liberals are characteristically in favor of it.  It’s part of the Democrat Party platform.  How could people who have hair-trigger reactions of conscience to other concerns–for example, environmental or racial, or saving dolphins and baby seals–just pass over as a matter of “a woman’s choice” the killing of a human fetus in utero?  They don’t acknowledge God, the real one anyway, but are condemned for gross hypocrisy by the moral canons to which they already hold.  So when one does something as slight as suggesting that some progressive idea might be subject to questioning, it is likely to set off a violent chain reaction, for its holders know what this means about their souls, and to say they don’t like it is an understatement.  Don’t be surprised at the extent or irrationality of what they will do by way of attempts to exterminate.

 

You’re sitting on a powder keg, smoking a cigar, and if it goes off, one is past argument and into the realm of sheer irrationality in which one no longer should imagine he can use reason as either an offensive or defensive tool, but rather holds to it as a testimony of light in darkness, a moral duty of those who love Truth.  It does no good to worry or complain in such environs about the irrationality of one’s adversaries, but one goes about one’s business honorably, and as calmly and cheerfully as possible, never giving anyone just cause to question his goodness.  Ultimately this is because we fear God–and I suppose even the Kantian one would do for such purposes.

 

In your position I would give some thought to whether my father was using me as a tool to forward his own agenda.  In my own case I would reject the notion because it is subject to several major problems, the greatest of which is indefinite regress, for my father got his ideas from someone else, as it seemed good to him, and so back through a great many others.  I am not my father’s puppet if I freely agree with him and with those who think as he does when I am at liberty to disagree.  Somewhere along the line one has to abandon the charge that opinions and loyalties among conservatives are the product of psychological coercion, even when on occasion they may be.  And of course, the coercion table turns nicely, especially in the modern university that wants to have its students concerned with diversity, as long as its definition excludes anyone who thinks differently than a modern liberal.