Hello, Anyone interested in a debate?

[Mister Agenda]

Yeah, you're going to need to do a... far better job of explaining your position before someone will agree to debate you on it.

As you wish:

I understand the atheistic position to not accept that which may not be empirically verified.  Therefore it may be said atheism does not recognize that which is metaphysical and cannot be verified empirically.  

I further understand atheism to contend that our sentiments, feelings, compulsion, instincts, and so forth are simply a result of of the chemical reactions in our brains.  Thereby rendering us as meat automatons which react to stimuli.

Being meat automatons that react to stimuli means there is no "person" and we are no different than a rock which reacts to its surroundings or bacteria which reacts to stimuli.

You've got atheism and empiricism mixed up. All there is to atheism is not believing in any deities actually being real, full stop.

That first misunderstanding contributes to the next two, but not fully. You skipped a step between 'chemically-based' and 'meat-automatons', probably are using a peculiar defintion of 'automaton', and probably meant to say 'only react to stimuli', because it would be very odd if we didn't react to stimuli, God or not, right?

At any rate, you're about as wrong as would be expected from someone who hasn't bothered to find out the first thing about us before forming conclusions that reassure you that there's not the slightest possibility of an opinion on the topic of God's existence differing from yours having any inkling of merit. Good strategy for staying safe and comfortable in your current worldview, but visiting us isn't, so I have some hope that you're reachable.