This research explores the ongoing attack upon universities caused by an “intellectual intolerance” and a “political one-sidedness” (Etchemendy) within its own walls that, if left unaddressed, will inflict great damage to scholars, research, and institutions of higher learning. The project focuses on the experiences of students who identify as conservatives (religiously and/or politically) in order to interrogate the theory and practice of diversity in academia and, particularly, in the humanities. Based on the assumption that the university operates on predominantly secular (Crowley, Neitz) and liberal (Abrams, Etchemendy, Haidt, Yancey) modes, this research argues that students with identities and identifications outside of these modes have “minority” status. This research broadens current conceptions of “diversity” to include not merely visible markers of identity like race, sex, and ability (Moya), but also less visible markers such as religious belief, political ideology, and experiential knowledge. Furthermore, it problematizes “minority” identities within academia to include students whose ideologies, experiences, and perspectives are marginalized, even subjugated (Yancey). This research introduces data from student writings as evidence that ideological homophily leads to many missed opportunities for expanding free debate and advancing scholarship. It offers recommendations to help educators implement and cultivate holistic diversity in their pedagogical practices.