What an outstanding intellectual dishonesty!  
Aren't we who blame religion for the wars, it's the people at war who does it.
And yes, it's recurrent that you use your imaginary friend to "forgive your sins"; let me tell you that under an atheists point of view only the people you did harm to can forgive you, not your imaginary friend.

The Universe is quantum, binary is a cheap hack for make it easier for us.

An Atheist has probably the most difficult task: Assume responsibility.
Unlike theists we lack a deity to blame.
So yes, I take such responsibility on my daily actions.

There's a pretty simple and plain forward moral rule to abide to:

"Don't do to others what you wouldn't want them to do to you".

Easy and solves most of the problems... and turns funny religious people is usually so unaware of it.

We've a law, agree or disagree, it's the law.
A clerk is meant to operate within the law and doesn't have any power to change, avoid or ignore it, leave alone claim "God's law".
So, no, she isn't right.

Dude, you've no evidence of nothing! You've long shots based on theories you clearly don't know.
Entropy proves zip, the Universe ain't binary or exact to start with.

This is like the most desperate, senseless and moronic display of lack of arguments I'd ever seen!!! 

There's no other definition for atheism other than "disbelief in God".
I understand however, and we often come to a clash with what I call "American Atheism", AA's seams to imply some oddities to Atheism, such as same sex marriage, abortion, gay rights and a whole load of dogmatic crap that is alien to Atheism, basically they want to input a sort of leftist view or "caviar-leftism" to Atheism.

Doctrines are bad by definition, because ANY course of action can be either good or bad based upon its context. Doctrine and dogmatic views always follow irrational responses by ignoring this factor.
In other words what's good for me may not be good for you and vice-versa, and what may be good today may be bad tomorrow.

And please! Stop with "falsehoods" and "Messiahs"! That sounds so irrational! Specially taken that you're talking of a religion made by Romans some 100 years after the supposed Jesus existed, if he ever did.

You're mistaken Atheism by some sort of "belief in science".
And there's no such thing as "Big Bang law", it's a theory.

Atheism is the lack of belief in deities, just that, nothing else, doesn't imply a shred of belief on anything, scientific or otherwise, and has absolutely no doctrine.
Doctrines are irrational actions based upon political views or religion, regardless if the conditions when those actions can be considered good or not.
For an instance, the Communist doctrine aims a lot at a sort of factory worker that doesn't exist anymore, yet because they take Marx and Lenin as doctrine they don't change.
Likewise, in the Middle Eastern religions there's a doctrine against eating pork, this makes perfect sense as hogs takes too much a water, a scarce good at the region. The same idea at mid-Europe would be senseless.

Atheists are more akin to think rationally and try to analyze the decision/consequences factor to determine the course of action.

You've "factual evidence" of nothing and atheism has no doctrines.

Sorry to disagree with that! That sort of sentence is what religious people use to play victim!
The problem relies on doctrines. You see, isn't the "I believe in this" the problem, it's the "because I believe in this then YOU must do that (or else)".
Nobody cares about belief itself.

Watching a documentary about yet another religion of crackpots;

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32412212

Now tell me, do we have reasons to love religion?
But there's a catch, a good Atheist will unlike or hate religion(s), not people. They're separate things, the same people without religion can be good people, the issue is often the religion itself and its doctrines.

I think we just get to know who is funding and keeping ISIS...
It would be senseless that in a very high-tech world a bunch of middle aged rats could do such damage, isn't it?

This recalls me of a very concerning words of a girl who went to join ISIS, she said "men keeps us safe and let us know when and where there will be airstrikes". Isn't this funny that somehow without advanced radar arrays they know "when and where" the US led coalition is going to strike?

Seams we've to think over the European alliances and stop thinking on "Russia AND Europe" to start putting this straight: There's no "Russia AND Europe", "Russia IS in Europe".

That book speaks of young yet un-enrolled soldiers, not people of the age of those so called "refugees". Those people are seasoned soldiers and could only be here for two reasons; their faction got beaten and they managed to escape or they are active assets of a faction.
It takes some intel in the ground ASAP before they got their AK47 shipped from home and maybe the next time there will be no soldiers at a train.

The focus is easy to achieve by inserting some willing terrorists as "guides" and using the moving sheep as cover up.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/555434/Islamic-State-ISIS-Smuggler-THOUSANDS-Extremists-into-Europe-Refugees

https://www.facebook.com/196086673748176/photos/a.196092307080946.44297.196086673748176/967347169955452/?type=1&theater

You can't "unconvert" soldiers! The ones that would move to another army are cowards, and those you've no use to.
These guys are of a "certain" age they already enlisted and come with a very specific target, way too specific. You don't see them to want to go anywhere other than UK and Germany, this denotes a background strategy.
No place in History ever got this sort of "refugees", or at least none ever [was stupid enough to] call this sort of people "refugees".

The Quran is written in the VIII Century Al-Farahidi's Arabic, so it had to be "translated" or transcribed from its original form into it at some point.

Refugees are women, children and elders.
These guys however are mostly men in "combat age".

WRONG!

I don't care if you pray to whatever you want!
I care for the social impact of you trying to impose shit and want others to do or act like monkeys just because your God or whatever rig you joined told you to.

You are talking like if atheism implies we care about you to worship your deity, and this might be true with some since atheism has no doctrine, but under a rational view, whatever you worship is up to you.
The problem relies on the group psychology applied to the organized religions. Like in a concert when the singer asks the people to shout, wave, raise hands... obviously it is just stupid, he doesn't need that to sing and if you went there to listen to his music, the noise of people shouting or the visual noise of waving hands are counter-producing to the desired effect. However the singer is trying to see if the group is paying attention and under control.
Similar to what you've with the scammers you call preachers and prophets. What sort of God cares if you have a prepuce or women is covered up or naked, or you're pointing at a specific geographic location? So, that's just a way for the scammer to know he is in control of the group.

You're trying to make a point at a blunt end.
Unlike religions atheists do NOT have any sort of books or doctrines imposing them to perform those things.
As someone said "there will always be bad people, but it takes religion to put good people doing bad things".

Killing people
Harassing people
Unawareness of the boundaries of legitimacy
World domination attempts
Gender violence
Sexual violence
...
and the list goes on and on and on and on...