Columbia University in New York City is slated to hold six segregated graduation ceremonies based on ethnicity, income, and sexual orientation.

All in the name of “multiculturalism,” the college decided to host separate graduations to “complement” existing school-wide ceremonies, which will take place online, according to the university’s website.

The ceremonies listed include “Latinx Graduation,” “Black Graduation,” “Asian Graduation,” “FLI Graduation” for “first-generation and/or low-income community” students, “Native Graduation” for Native-American students, and “Lavender Graduation” for those who identify with the LGBT community.

Mercy Muroki, a researcher for The Centre for Social Justice, condemned the decision by Columbia, rebuking the university for “going backwards.”

The Washington Examiner reported in 2019 that, of the 173 schools the National Association of Scholars examined, 76 around the U.S. were offering segregating graduation ceremonies based on skin color.

Some of the most notable universities included Harvard, UC San Diego, UC Irvine, Arizona State, Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Yale. Many of the segregated ceremonies were co-hosted by black student groups, campus resource centers, or specific academic departments.

The NAS described the separate commencement ceremonies as an example of “neo-segregation” on college campuses, condemning it as “a breeding ground of racial conflict in American society.”

“Neo-segregation inculcates in young people the readiness to cling to a victim identity at the expense of becoming a positive member of the larger community,” the NAS report stated. “No doubt a large portion of the racial grievance politics we see in society at large these days is the careful nurtured product of campus neo-segregation.”

And in 2017, NAS research associate Dion Pierre more specifically rebuked segregated graduations, arguing they would only serve to inflame already present tensions.

“Ultimately, university officials go wrong when they treat students as black, Latino, or Asian, i.e., as different. By doing so, they reinforce the idea of interminable inequality and conflict between the races,” he wrote. “If our universities hope to ease racial tensions, they should encourage students and parents to meet one another as citizens united by a common sense of purpose, not as mutually opposed ethnic groups.”

HD Editor’s Note: Why Is This News Biblically Relevant?

Ken Ham in his article “Responding to Racism—No Other Answer Than the Gospel” wrote on the Biblical response to racism and pointed out the error in falling into the social justice lie of “institutional racism“:

I’ve been speaking on the topic since the 1970s and have made it a vital component of our teaching at AiG. Now the true solution to racism is grounded in the history in the book of Genesis and the gospel. Because the solutions offered by so many in our culture are anti-biblical, we want believers to be equipped to respond in a way that honors the Lord and his Word.

And I’m not the only one saying this. Far from it! As just one example, Voddie Bauchum, who has spoken at many of our past conferences, was recently featured in an article on the website Christian Headlines. In the interview, he called attention to the centrality of the gospel in any biblical response to racism:

And it’s been interesting to watch scenes of white people, literally kneeling and bowing and genuflecting, in repentance over their sin of—of white privilege. Or, you know, bias. Or conscious bias. Or unconscious bias. Or whatever else . . .

Ultimately, “this religion [of social justice] is promising salvation, somewhere other than God . . . And unfortunately, there are many Christians who are sounding like they’re satisfied with this.” . . .

[Voddie] made a distinction between individual racism and institutional racism, calling them “two competing worldviews” . . .

“One worldview that says racism is individual. It’s an individual heart issue. And that’s the world where we deal with the individual heart issue, with the message of the gospel . . . But then there’s another worldview that says, no, no, no, no. Regardless of individual heart issue, this is a structural and institutional issue.”

As I’ve shared in the past, the gospel is the answer to racism. Salvation isn’t found anywhere but in Christ! And the sin of racism, ultimately, is a heart issue—it’s caused by sin in the hearts of men and women. A heart/spiritual problem requires a spiritual solution—and the only solution is the biblical truth that we’re all one race (which is confirmed by the science of genetics) and the gospel of Jesus Christ that is offered to all.

When Jesus’ disciples came to Him and asked, “What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” Jesus explained to them that one of the signs that would precede His coming would be “nations” rising against “nations.”

The word “nations” found in this verse (Matthew 24:7) is from the Greek word “ethnos,” where we get our English word for “ethnicity.” Therefore, this verse can also be read that “ethnicity shall rise against ethnicity” in the last days.

Racism is not new. However, what is new to our generation is the fabricated racism taught in schools, espoused by the media, and canceled by ‘culture.’ This stoking of division will, in the not too distant future, lead to genuine widespread racism. Racism is a sin. Creating division and hatred is a sin (Prov. 6:16-19, Luke 11:17, 1 John 2:9). All of these things are deeply rooted in a rebellion against God, His Word, and His design.