Objective. The goal of this article is to analyze the relationship between religion, measured in terms of religious affiliation and religiosity, and public opinion about same-sex marriage, civil unions, and a federal constitutional amendment that would prohibit gay marriage. Methods. We use logistic regression with calculated standardized coefficients to analyze data from a nationally representative survey of 1,610 respondents conducted in March-April 2004. Results. Religious variables perform better than demographic measures in models of attitudes about same-sex unions. Non-Protestants are much more likely to support same-sex unions than are Protestants, and individuals with conservative attitudes toward morality and secularism and (to a lesser extent) those who participate actively in religious life are more likely to oppose such unions. On the whole, religious variables play a weaker role in predicting support for a constitutional amendment to prevent gay marriage than they do in predicting attitudes toward same-sex unions. Conclusions. Religious variables play powerful roles in structuring attitudes about same-sex unions. Moreover, homosexuality appears to be a major component of the ''moral values'' discourse that is currently so popular in American politics.

This review synthesizes research about religion in the lives of post-1965 immigrants to the United States. Such research consists primarily of case studies, published since 1990, focused on individual religious organizations started and attended by immigrants. We analyze these case studies to demonstrate the different ways religion influences immigrants' adaptation in the United States. We then consider how religion informs immigrants' ethnic and gender-based identities, their experiences of civic and political life, and the lives of the second generation. We argue that current research is more descriptive than analytic overall, and we highlight a series of research questions and comparisons to enrich theoretical thinking. In particular, we advocate a comparative approach to examining immigrants' religious organizations and increased attention to a "lived religion" perspective, which takes seriously the ways religion is important for immigrants outside of religious organizations in social institutions, including civic organizations, families, workplaces, schools, and health-care organizations.

Aims To understand how nurses experience providing care for patients hospitalized with COVID‐19 in intensive care units. Background As hospitals adjust staffing patterns to meet the demands of the pandemic, nurses have direct physical contact with ill patients, placing themselves and their families at physical and emotional risk. Methods From June to August 2020, semi‐structured interviews were conducted. Sixteen nurses caring for COVID‐19 patients during the first surge of the pandemic were selected via purposive sampling. Participants worked in ICUs of a quaternary 1,000‐bed hospital in the Northeast United States. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, identifiers were removed, and data were coded thematically. Results Our exploratory study identified four themes that describe the experiences of nurses providing care to patients in COVID‐19 ICUs during the first surge: (a) challenges of working with new co‐workers and teams, (b) challenges of maintaining existing working relationships, (c) role of nursing leadership in providing information and maintaining morale and (d) the importance of institutional‐level acknowledgement of their work. Conclusions As the pandemic continues, hospitals should implement nursing staffing models that maintain and strengthen existing relationships to minimize exhaustion and burnout. Implications for Nursing Management To better support nurses, hospital leaders need to account for their experiences caring for COVID‐19 patients when making staffing decisions.

Over the past 25 years, the Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has changed its guidelines regarding religious/spiritual care of hospitalized patients to increase attention concerning this aspect of hospital-based care. Little empirical evidence assesses the extent to which hospitals relied on hospital chaplains as care providers during these years. This study investigates (1) the extent of chaplaincy service availability in US hospitals between 1980 and 2003; (2) the predictors of having chaplaincy services in 1993 and 2003; and (3) the change in the magnitude of these predictors between years. This study examines the presence or absence of chaplaincy or pastoral care services in hospitals using the American Hospital Association Annual Survey of Hospitals (ranging from 4,946-6,353 hospitals) in 1980-1985, 1992-1993, and 2002-2003. Between 54% and 64% of hospitals had chaplaincy services between 1980 and 2003, with no systematic trend over this period. In 1993 and 2003, hospital size, location, and church affiliation were central factors influencing the presence of chaplaincy services. Smaller hospitals and those in rural areas were less likely to have chaplaincy services. Church-operated hospitals were much more likely to have chaplaincy services; but between 1993 and 2003, church-operated hospitals were more likely to drop chaplaincy services than to add them. Not-for-profit hospitals were more likely than investor-owned hospitals to add chaplaincy services. Changes to Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations policies about the religious/spiritual care of hospitalized patients between 1980 and 2003 seem to have had no discernible effect on the fraction of US hospitals that had chaplaincy services. Rather, characteristics of hospitals, their surroundings, and their religious affiliations influenced whether they provided chaplaincy services to patients.