What's more important, teaching or politics?

I ran across a story at the FIRE this morning that I wish had surprised me.  Colleges and universities are using political litmus tests in hiring new faculty.  Just as the Donald Hindley vs. Brandeis case, the University of Delaware residence life re-education program, and the UD case where a student was barred from campus pending a psychological review because of his opinions didn't surprise so much as horrify me, this bothers me far more than it surprises me.  

Basically, what FIRE board of directors member and University of Massachusetts-Amherst professor Daphne Patai has uncovered is a list of questions, provided by the Equal Employment Opportunity office to the various hiring committees on campus.  These questions are designed to test professorial candidates' political views on gender and minority issues, and on social justice.  

I know similar things exist at some Midwestern schools.  I don't know if where I teach also has something similar, since I didn't face a hiring committee for my part-time instructor's position.  However, given the direction that most institutions of higher education are heading, I wouldn't be surprised.  

And honestly, it makes me wonder two things.  First, is it worth it to me to get that terminal degree and attempt to be hired on full time?  I'm pretty sure that my politics would not match up in the slightest degree with those of my department.  In fact, my deepest held belief is that politics have no place in the classroom, other than as a springboard to help my students come up with topics to write about.

And second, what's more important to these institutions of higher education?  The right politics, or the quality of the instruction provided?

I'm sadly certain that the answer does not benefit the students.