The normal sentient being on the street has got to wonder why the University of Delaware is foisting this insulting program on its students, who pay, I’m sure, a good deal of money to live in its dormitories.

Several comments by the U of D Vice President for Student Life really stick out. They are disingenuous, but they also make no logical sense:

1) “I assume that you have noted the absence of any policy, rule, or regulation pertaining to your concerns about disciplinary action being taken against students for unwillingness to be changed in the manner that you describe.”

Then why interview them in the first place? Why ask rude, prying questions of a personal nature? (And if a student decides to answer such questions, could their replies be used against them at a later date in a university administrative hearing or in a court of law?) If FIRE ends up taking this to court, a demand should be made that all notes and recordings of said interviews be destroyed.

2) "The notion that students at the University of Delaware can be coerced into any one point of view does a great disservice not only to the institution but also to the student body, which is bright, creative and represents a wide array of thought," Gilbert said.

Well, it is obvious that some students do feel coerced. So the notion is valid. The fact that a group of people is bright, creative and represents a wide array of thought is no guarantee that individuals cannot be threatened and bullied into conforming to specific behaviors and ideas. (See “Twentieth Century, History of” for list of notable leaders and bureaucrats who developed highly efficient systems for coercing bright and creative people into doing what previously had been unthinkable.)

3) “The residential life educational program, which has been developed with the express intent of helping students think critically and analytically, has had the input of student leaders, faculty and administrators and is continually assessed through feedback from individuals and through focus groups.”

Why is the residence life program involved with helping students to think critically and analytically? Isn’t that the responsibility of academic departments?

The good news here is that the sensitivity bureaucrats who are so common on college campuses are going too far to be ignored. People are (and have been) thoroughly fed up with this nonsense, not to mention the “Tunnel of Oppression” funhouse, and “Vagina Monologue” shock theater productions that show up yearly on campuses. I hope that parents, taxpayers, and alumni will begin to put more pressure on schools to come to their senses. Can’t the people running things at our universities see how goofy and shallow this stuff makes them look?

If Delaware really believes their program merely poses provocative questions for which there are no correct answers, why did they not promote "freedom of expression" by structuring the program around viewpoints contra to those they did?

You know -- around points of view that Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingrahm, Michelle Malkin, Sean Hannity and George W. Bush would agree with?

(I would object just as strongly if they had. Coercive indoctrination is wrong, whether it's leftist or rightist. )

I like how it's been said over and over that the meetings were mandatory, but the kids didn't really have to go.

Way to train good citizens - teach them to be scofflaws.