You know, I almost launched into exactly the same discussion yesterday.
This (and also BB's and my discussion about Judas) is a great example having a common moral baseline (the Bible). The existence of such an agreed-upon foundation has enormous and far-reaching consequences -- such as, for example, enabling the Constitutional system we now enjoy (cf. John Adams' comment about it being "wholly inadequate" for any but a moral and religious people).
The libertarians, with their theories of a "moral marketplace," never seem willing to admit that one cannot build anything until the foundation is complete -- something that the very nature of the "moral marketplace" cannot permit. It's not that libertarians (and objectivists) don't realize this: they're more than willing to tell us what they think the foundation should be. Some are even willing to lie about the foundation being "objective." But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and any discussion of prostitution or pornography will quickly reveal their ideas to be based on the shifting sands of the "moral marketplace."
There is also the simple matter of trust -- we can trust that others will respond in a manner that is essentially consistent with our own moral outlook. This, more than anything else, is the real precondition for limited government, good education, or a healthy church. The libertarian or objectivist view of "self-interest" clearly does not foster such trust.
So what does this have to do with a discussion of the soul? Pretty much everything, IMHO -- it all depends on how we see ourselves in relation to God.
This thread is an extension of the very issues you raise, i.e. governance and the soul. It is important, it is more than important, it is vital.
Well and truly said, r9etb. Thank you so much for writing.