My question is, considering that societal law and consequences regarding earthly liberties barely keeps things in check, what would happen if these Atheists got their way and NO ONE had a fear of the after life?. We're talking about BILLIONS of people. [Stg]

I have come across a few Atheists during my life [people who proclaim to be Atheists/Non believers]. Interestingly, all were people who seemed to me 'kinder' and more 'giving people' to the community as opposed to the many catholics I grew up around and know now. These atheists are more conscious of being law abiding also Stg.

Loving nature and treating people with respect was one athiest woman's philosophy through life, and she stated, these were her golden rules.

In summary, my response to your question Stg is that the world or our country would not be in a worse situation if every person did not believe and/or did not possess a fear in the after-life.

To some my post will look strange and confronting.
But I do believe if real hard core evidence exists that no God exists, world governments would not release it.
While convinced of the basic goodness in most reildgions I give the credit, and the blame to man for actions of all of them.
Doubt thrown on evolution, some times denial of evidence that can not be denied, is a symptom of fears some have that humanity still needs its crutches.
Maybe some do, even I have expressed thoughts of something not known to us, not however a God, but maybe a wish to believe in something other than a God.
This debate must confront the host of Gods, every one of them, remember to those who follow each of them, ours is false.
For the sake of the debate we must include every human remember God or no Gods we like to say all humans are equal

I can only speak for myself- an atheist raised by atheists- that I probably hold myself to much, much higher moral standards than most theists do- and unlike many theists, I don't make it a personal crusade to 'correct' anyone or force them to behave in a way more pleasing to myself.

In short, I gravely doubt religion goes anywhere NEAR as far as many claim into improving morals.

Wouldn't you recon people that are brainwashed into believing in something that is immaterial, would keep it to them self. Probably 7 day adventists, roaming the streets with kids.
They wouldn't even get buried like other normal people.
Keep ya beliefs of the imagination to your self.

StG: "My question is, considering that societal law and consequences regarding earthly liberties barely keeps things in check, what would happen if these Atheists got their way and NO ONE had a fear of the after life?"

It seems to me the almost near certain threat of being sent to jail for your unsocial actions is likely to have much more impact that same vague threat of what happens many years into the future, when you are dead. That neatly dovetails with the observation that countries with efficient police forces such as Australia and Japan are also have the least crime.

Interestingly, countries that do have strong, reliable and fair systems of justice also tend to be the most secular. The Brits, the Scandinavians, the Swiss are all secular. In countries that don't, such are Afghanistan, Uganda, and so on, religion thrives. Maybe, as you say StG, where government can't fill the need for encouraging good behaviour, religion does a similar job.

Nonetheless, we are left with the correlation, based on crime and corruption rates, that secular societies do a much better job of getting everyone to behave civilly than religion does.

I think that answers your question.

StG

Your sarcasm is duly noted - particularly as it reveals a complete lack of understanding of my post.

I used the examples of animal cooperation to illustrate that moral behaviour is not confined to humans and therefore religion is not the only contributor to civil behaviour - as other posters have demonstrated, far from it.

As for finding you question offensive, within it lies the implication that non-religious are somehow unable to behave ethically without the threat of eternal damnation to goad us into being good. That you have since modified your stance to acknowledge that atheists can and do behave ethically and conversely that religious can behave very badly indeed, is commendable.

All of which leads me to ask what is the point of your original question? Both religious and non-religious can behave badly or with the greatest of altruism and courage. Hence your question is entirely moot.