PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.

Having recently returned from a river cruise down the Danube – including stops at World War II sites that chronicled the atrocities of Adolph Hitler as he tried to incinerate all Jews – I cannot help but think of this country’s issue with immigrants.

To be sure, the immigrants do not constitute a race of people, as was the case with the Jews, but they do represent poor folks who have been identified by “our” president, one Donald Trump, not worthy of a second thought.

I, for one, choose to stand against the Trump doctrine that immigrants do not deserve to come to this country because they, somehow, are second-class potential citizens and, even, criminals.

Here are the two perspectives on immigrants in this country.

Perspective #1: All immigrants, especially those from Mexico, should be bared from entering this country because they are criminals. So says President Donald Trump, along with many of his followers, who support his foolhardy support for building a wall.

Perspective #2: This country was founded on the backs of immigrants and, to this day, the United States benefits from the contributions of those who want to share in the freedom of life in the U.S.

Those perspectives are far apart and, apparently, never the twain shall meet.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post showed up recently with a clear description of the immigration problem in the aftermath of concern about Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on Mexico as a way to stem the tide of immigrants (which did not fully work the Trump wanted).

Here is what Post editors wrote:

“The more durable fix (for the immigration problem) would be to allow for the legal flow of immigrants that the economy needs, including legal status for ‘dreamers’ — immigrants generally brought here as small children who are Americans in all but documentation. Such reform would then impose real penalties on employers who hire undocumented workers. Trump could achieve such a reform if he ceased inflaming the issue for electoral advantage, vilifying immigrants as ‘criminals’ and ‘invaders.’”

My basic question is this: Can politics and religion – read, Christianity – ever build bridges, not walls to deal with the immigration issue?

I am not sure, especially if you come from the perspective that politics and religion should never meet, at least in the public square.

I generally believe that to be true, but, in this case, I believe Christianity has something important to say about how this country treats immigrants.

In politics, apart from Trump’s diatribes, it strikes me that there should be a consensus around one basic proposition: This country should provide a way for immigrants to enter legally instead of, under Trump, making it more difficult and accusing all those who try to enter of being criminals.

For Trump and “his wall,” he must believe that he benefits if he leads his followers to be anti-immigrant. For him, the issue is not developing sound policy. The issue is either appealing to his base or fomenting controversy via Twitter, all in the continuing infomercial for his Trump brand, whatever that brand is.

As for religion – or, better put, being a Christian — I believe scripture contains admonitions for us that should capture our attention and compel our action.

Recent sermons at our church here in Salem, Oregon, dealt with our responsibility, as Christians, to help those less fortunate than ourselves; to care for what was called, the “quartet of the vulnerable” – widows, children, strangers, and the poor.

These were not sermons on immigration, per se, nor were they comments on the state of immigration politics in this country, which is a topic, fortunately, not dealt with from the front of our church sanctuary. The sermons were calls for us to function as real Christians.

These sermons emphasized the following to me:

• The importance of recognizing the admonitions in Isaiah 58: 6-7: “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: To loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke; to set the oppressed free and break every yoke?

“Is it not to share your food with the hungry, and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter – when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not turn away from your own flesh and blood.

“Then your light will break forth like the dawn, and your healing will quickly appear; then your righteousness will go before you and the glory of the Lord will be your rear guard.”

• The importance of recognizing the admonitions in James 2:15-16: “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one says to him, go, I wish you well and keep warm and well fed, but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?”

We can go on in this country following Trump when he leads us to take care of only ourselves and not those who need help – to oppose all immigrants who want to enter this country. What he leads us to is division and selfishness, not collaboration and kindness.

Or, despite Trump, we can follow what the Bible says about helping others, no matter their particular station in life.

In his insightful exploration of the “pre-history” of the Holocaust, “Why the Germans? Why the Jews?” (2011), German historian Götz Aly has observed that the Nazis’ racial theories were significant because they fomented anti-Semitism, which was already ingrained among all social strata of Germany and Austria by the time Hitler arrived on the scene, but more because those theories made hatred acceptable to the haters.

The idea was that an objective, scientific theory of racial purity lay behind their antipathy to the Jews. And, Aly wrote, the notion allowed Germans “to conceal their shameful, base resentment of others behind supposedly more sophisticated arguments.”

I fear that the same could be said of what anti-immigrants believe about those who want to seek a better life in this country. They are not like us, so oppose them.

Better, I say, to follow the scripture in Philippians 2:4: “Do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others” – and, for me, the others in this case are immigrants.