In one of the strangest BBC articles I've seen in ages, the BMA has complained that Christians are more likely to prolong the life of their patients by suggesting pallative care - and that's a BAD thing, because everyone should be a functional Atheist at work.
In this weird and rambling article, the BBC claims (conflictingly) both that Christian doctors should leave their principles at the surgery door, and work in a purely dispassionate, objective way and also that they should have their patients interests at heart.
I thought doctors were supposed to be following the hypocratic oath, which is primarily concerned with doing good and at the least, not harming the patient.
This does rather all smack of secular propaganda, for example, it's an article attacking religious people, but no viewpoints of Christians are offered, so there's no balance. It does however put forward 'Dying with dignity' agenda across, a pro-euthanasia organisation. It also uses the way in which the secular industry's pro-death media campaign has shifted public opinion over the decades (by publicizing a number of cases of people who want to die) to then put the pressure on Christian doctors.
The reality is that one's beliefs (or lack of them) actually do influence a person's professional conduct, because they influence one's ideas and goals. This is true for religious people and secular people. There's no neutral setting and defining oneself as being neutral doesn't change that.
