I'll tell you what, despite the fact that I don't and can't consider this a serious conversation because I consider you delusional and incapable of reason (all theists are), I'll play nice since you are.

> I've known no atheist who actually believes the nonsense that "right and wrong are agreements between people."

I wager you don't understand atheists well enough to have a clue how they actually think because reasoning is a foreign concept to a mind that thinks divine decree is source enough for answers.

There is no such thing as absolute right and wrong, that's not an opinion, that's a fact. If right and wrong were absolute, there'd be no disagreement about what constitutes right and wrong. Right and wrong are determined by the individual and negotiated by society into laws. To even attempt to claim there's a such thing as absolute right and wrong you must demonstrate a source for said absolutes and no one in the history of mankind has been able to do so because it doesn't exist.

Christians (and others) currently conduct in barbarism otherwise known as genital mutilation that any reasoning person sees as clearly wrong, yet you have no problem cutting parts off babies. I think that's wrong, you likely don't, why... because there are no absolutes.

Christian morals are certainly not absolute, they evolve over time, because they, like all morals, are the result of negotiation among individuals.

> After all, German society had redefined humanity to exclude Jews.

And the rest of the world reasoned this was wrong and acted to stop him. See how that works, reasoning among people.

> Hitler was acting consistently within his society's moral code.

But not within the moral code of those who had the power to stop him. Again, reasoning between people.

> My world-view absolutely has no problem saying Hitler was wrong.

Nor do atheists or any other reasoning people. That you think others have trouble saying Hitler was wrong simply shows how badly you understand how others think.

> Right and wrong make sense given the Christian's set of axioms.

No they don't. You worship a mass murderer (from your own perspective) and say murder is wrong. If you think Christians are moral I have news for you, Christians are some of the worst examples of mankind that exist. You teach fear and ignorance, you teach discrimination and hate, you oppress those you don't agree with all the while claiming you're being oppressed.

You are no better than the Taliban; you are in fact the American equivalent.

> Not so with the atheist

False, reasoning always makes sense and always arrives at equal or better answers than following rules lain down by ignorant savages from millennia ago.

> How would you characterize your beliefs on the existence of non-material things?

Depends on what you mean by non-material.

> Do you believe in a ghost or spirit?

There's no evidence that would warrant a belief in such things.

> Are there non-material objects that exist given your view of the world? For example, is there such a thing as a "law" that governs our thoughts or the natural world?

Depends on what you mean by governs. Again, you and I are animals evolved from more violent past animals grasping to survive in a world full of other violent animals. The natural world exists, and follows what appear to be consistent rules that are merely the side effects of the nature of matter and energy; we call these rules Physics.