As such, it is clear that my own personal belief in God shapes the way I view and experience the world, as well as my decisions in how to act within it. There are both theistic and naturalistic consequences to the act of believing or not believing. Essentially, from a theistic perspective, not believing can have detrimental consequences on the individual. Not believing leaves one open to not participating in a larger theistic understanding, which can have many believe that one would be placing one's soul in danger. The consequences of believing, however, would be that one could actually be saved in the event that God is actually real. From a naturalist perspective, when an individual or society does not believe, "there are no moral boundaries for good or evil -- you simply live life and hope to be luckier than the next guy in beating the odds of natural causes and processes" (Auten 2008). This generates the assumption that not believing changes the way we behave in our natural setting and the way society functions in order to...

On the other hand, believing has its own sets of consequences that provide the individual with a greater sense of security in an unrelentingly dangerous world. Not believing in God does carry with it specific ramifications that will ultimately affect the rest of society as well as the self. Essentially, when an entire society does not believe, there is an impact on the moral standing and structure of that society. As morality is often defined in close relation to religious ideals and the belief in a God which represents those ideals, a lack of belief would impact the overall structure of how morals are defined within society itself.
References

Auten, Brian. (2008). A cumulative case for the existence of God. Apologetics 315. Web. http://www.apologetics315.com/2008/01/cumulative-case-for-existence-of-god.html

Phillips, W.G., Brown, W.E., & Stonestreet, J. (2008). Making Sense of Your World: A Biblical Worldview. 2nd ed. Salem, WI: Sheffield Publishing Company.