For a time in my life, I was a U.S. Foreign Service officer and interviewed foreigners from a North African country applying for temporary visas to visit the United States. Since the country at the time was in a period of instability (and still is), many of those being interviewed saw a “temporary” visa to Europe or the U.S. as a path to a better life. Go “temporarily” and then remain, illegally if necessary.

As one who knows many blessings, I approached my job with humility. How could I not sympathize with the applicants and their problems? However, U.S. law required me to give temporary visas only to temporary visitors. The rules for permanent residence were more stringent, requiring sufficient family or employer support, among other requirements.

I had to refuse many, including one man who evidenced little reason to leave the U.S. if he were given a visa. Shortly after the refusal, the man’s relative living in the U.S. called to complain. As we talked, I tried to assure him that I had given the applicant a fair hearing, but that U.S. law forbade me to issue in this case. The caller’s parting shot at me was that since I had a Southern accent, I must be prejudiced against his relative.

I thought it ironic that he himself prejudged me. His idea, I suppose, is that if some Southerners are prejudiced, all Southerners are prejudiced, presumably against—well, against anyone not a native-born American, I suppose. Ironic also because, in another function of my job, I awarded immigrant visas to those of his nationality which allowed them to live legally and permanently in the United States. The difference did not concern origin but whether or not the applicant met the required legal standards.

The heart of prejudice is the attitude that assigns a stereotype to an individual because of his or her accent or nationality or color or political preference or whatever. The list is long. How much better if we remove the filters of group and relate as one individual to another.