There are several main differences in “correcting” a child’s behavior (let us not use the word “punish”). First, the Christian parent would possibly take the Bible literally (“Spare the rod and spoil the child”). Second, the Christian would remind the child that “His eye is on the sparrow”—that is, there is no such thing as not being watched. Third, the Christian parent would explain how the child’s “soul” was in jeopardy, and would describe the pains of hell and the blessings of heaven—in other words, would refer to consequences after death. Finally, the best Christian parents would retell the story of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, for the child’s sins. The humanist, or the person who did not package his/her understanding of the universe in a persona or a book of wisdoms, would apply earth-based logic, cause-and-effect causality, to point out the damage such misdeeds cause in the long run—guilt, loss of trust, physical dangers, etc.—and would point to the immediate effects of the misdeed—broken vase because running in the house is prohibited, for example. He/she would use the opportunity to explain the implied “social contract” among families and society, and would elaborate on the Golden Rule as a gauge for unwitnessed behavior. In other words, a child’s misdeed is a teaching opportunity to help grow the ethical consciousness in the child, just as going to the zoo is an opportunity to teach taxonomies, otherness, and diversity.
Atheistic parents don't see the love behind correcting their child. Children grow up spoiled because parents don't know how to lead their child in the right way to go. All they can do is show a good example, something which they constantly fail to do.
Corrective measures are required. Consequences for wrongdoings are essential in bringing up a child. Anyone who looked out for it would see the differences between Christian children and Atheistic children, not just because of their religion, but because of the way they are brought up .