What Passes for Morals

Somehow, I ended up reading a bit of silliness from an atheist today. It was about the conflict between the evangelical atheists, like Dawkins, who go around pushing atheism in everyone's face, and the more laid back version of atheists, namely those who are smart enough to know this is stupid. The author of said post was in the evangelical camp, because he thought he should be promoting rationality and helping to stamp out irrationality.
Of course, no atheist can point to a moral reason to do this, sans God. It's a total joke because the very first line of argument doesn't hold any water. Why would being rational be a moral imperative?
Without God, what passes for morality is a balancing act between desires. So any rational atheist would be fiercely committed to freedom, knowing that the trade offs each individual must make is unique to them, and cannot be adjudicated by the state. The collectivist is dangerous, even more so if he is an atheist, for he believes himself capable of stepping into the role of the being he denies.
Martin Luther claimed Sola Scriptora and was immediately surprised because Zwingli and a long list of others immediately disagreed with him on what the scriptures said. In similar fashion, I believe the atheist will be surprised by the various definitions of reason that will mushroom should Dawkins and company get their way.
Have none of them read about the French revolution? Even if I were an atheist, I would prefer to live in a Christian nation. Atheist countries kill their citizens far too often.