Read your newspaper. If people are generally good than why:
Do people enjoy breaking rules?
A sense of rebelliousness, remember though that rules are not morality and vise versa.
Do children get violent unless they are taught not to?
Do infants care more about themselves than anyone else- and will stay that way if they are not conditioned otherwise?
These are strong arguments for not having an innate sense of morality, at least from birth. However, from my work with children I know that they know when they have done something wrong. They might not always have the maturity to do the right thing but they know what the right thing is.
Is it easier to do wrong than right?
I think that it is easier to do right then wrong.
Also, how would you define good?
A hard question because I don't have a book to define it for me but for now I'll define it as "doing what will bring about the most happiness to the most people"
Examined, certainly- but no new ideas can be accepted as right and logical without first proving the older, logical idea false. No two ideas can be right and conflict with one another, unless there is a reason why and an explanation.
Not necessarily true. Take for example Newtonian physics vs. Relativity, the fact that Relativity is a more accurate model of the universe does not make Newtonian physics any less accurate in it's own domain. It also doesn't mean that everything in Newtonian physics is wrong, it simply means that Relativity is more accurate.
IF they are found to be wrong- but define wrong. Illogical? Immoral?
That's a good question, I suppose illogical would have to be the answer however I should to point out that just about everything I find immoral I also find illogical.
How do you mean? That we should never make decisions when afraid, or that we should never make a decision that is made because of a fear of something? Either of those would be illogical- children learn easier if there is a negative reinforcement for their behavior (not punishment).
Fear is usually based on reason on some level, like a child's fear of the dark being based on not knowing what is there. What I mean by this is to separate the reason from the emotion.
Excuse me? Where on earth do you get the idea that we have decency?
By working with children I suppose, they might cause trouble but I have yet to meet one that I would consider rotten.
There are many things we cannot accomplish, many mistakes we make, many things we don't understand.
There are also many things we have accomplished, many things we have corrected, many things we do understand.
Christians do not follow a set of rules because they're rules. Rather, they follow them out of respect and love for their-and our- Creator. Also, we have a relationship with the Creator.
Christianity is far more than a set of rules to follow...
I was talking about a child not following an arbitrary rule like not taking a cookie not moral precepts.
What do you think He did by sending Jesus? He proved His existance...
We believe by seeing signs- proof.
What kind of signs?
I think God can be proved beyond the shadow of a doubt. Otherwise, you would not have people dying for their faith with the ability to be unafraid and at peace.
People dying for their faith is not proof, otherwise you would have to acknowledge a supposed legitimacy of suicide bombers.
Rather than it being simply a "negative view", I find it to be a thoroughly realistic view. I should remark that, while I don't believe people are "generally good" or fundamentally good, I do believe that they are still quite capable of, and often do, many very good or positive things. I suppose you could say that the natural sinful condition of humanity is like a sickness -- a sickness for which only Christ is the cure. Knowing that people are "sick" and knowing the "cure" makes me concerned and sympathetic toward them, not merely negative. 
