In a sense it is the process rather than necessary outcomes of such a decision-making process that will be most different in these two cases. A naturalist will tend to explore existing ethical beliefs and acts to see what appears to be natural by surveying existing practices, whereas a Christian would take the position of G.E. Moore in his treatment of the "naturalistic fallacy" in assuming that "ought" statements are to be found in revelation, and are still true even if no one actually acts that way. As there are many different version of both naturalistic and Christian philosophy, it is not really possible to give examples of the differences between "all Christians" and "all naturalists". Peter Singer and Ayn Rand in some ways both start from naturalistic assumptions but end at quite different behaviours. The "What would Jesus drive" movement towards environmental awareness ends up with much the same behaviour as that of new atheists, and yet for different reasons.