There are so many answers to this question, but I want to focus in on one. I don't know how many of you have been following this story, but there is a mother who has become a member of a religious group (it's not very well known) and her 13-year-old son has cancer. Apparently, the prescribed treatment is something like 90% effective. That is, if the boy submits to chemotherapy, he'll most likely survive. However, the mother's new religious beliefs prohibit her from allowing her son to undergo the lifesaving treatment. The boy has also spoken up to refuse the treatment.
Now, the boy is in the care of child protective services because the state is going to force him to be treated. The issue is that leaving the child in the care of the mother will result in certain death, but giving him the treatment will very likely cure him. If the mother is going to kill him, then the state sees its job as protecting the life of the child.
These types of problems are not uncommon. Often, Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions. The courts usually get involved if the patient is a child, and the court orders the child to undergo treatment. Other cases pop up as well from time to time.
I used to think that the state should stay out of it. I use to think that infringing on their civil liberties and religious beliefs put the government one step closer to infringing on my liberties and religious beliefs. But I've come to change my mind.
There is an intrinsic problem when we talk about beliefs as "religious" as opposed to some other kind of belief. The problem is that "religious" usually goes hand in hand with their being a matter of taste or false. If their false beliefs or just a matter of taste, then the state does have an interest in ordering citizens to abide by true and objective beliefs if it serves the greater good. And, in these problematic medical cases, it is true that chemotherapy will cure cancer and won't send you to hell. Blood transfusions will save a life, not damn it to everlasting punishment. The court is, therefore, forcing people to live in reality.
Christianity is superior to these other religions because our beliefs are not "religious." Christianity is true and it is rational. Thus, these crazy medical problems just shouldn't arise within the Christian worldview. Any legitimate treatment will comport well with what we believe because that the treatment is beneficial is true, and all truth is God's truth.
The real issue is that Christianity fits the facts about the world around us. If the world makes medical discoveries or theoretical scientific discoveries, the Christian worldview can adopt them without making ad hoc accomodations--we're just adding to our stock of true beliefs.
