VenomFangX: Traditional Morality (Objective) versus Modern Morality (Subjective)

I almost hesitate in saying this, but on a few points I agree with VenomFangX. People that don't strive for to better themselves tend to define/structure their actions as being moral (i.e. good and/or acceptable behavior); causing them to stagnate, act impulsively, and badly. The problem with many people in general is that they lack the sort of empathetical capacity required to act good for the sake of being good. Most people behave poorly, and while the Bible (mostly the Old Testament) is a joke in the realm of morality, people that actually follow the teachings of Jesus perhaps would behave in a more objectively moral way (the well-being of those around is probably better vs. the alternative).

In practice I believe in belief in certain circumstances. Some people are just too stupid and narcissistic to behave well on their own. Such people need Jesus, otherwise they treat themselves and others like shit. What I am trying to say is that if your IQ falls below the average you should follow Jesus! Jesus offers morality for the mentally weak (be good or be punished!), some people wont be good for the sake of being good, they need a reward and/or fear of punishment to motivate them to behave properly.

I know most atheists will aggressively disagree with me here. But do such people really believe that ALL people would behave the same and/or better if they didn't have the moral structure that Christianity provides (heaven, hell, etc.)?