[SeekAndFind]

Why not try to meet people half-way? Why not try to engage them on the moral questions alone, especially if there is common agreement on lots of things?

I am working on the assumption that Dawkins is RIGHT -- That God doesn't exist.

If this is the case, I don't see the objective virtue of even needing to meet people halfway. Whether you want meet them halfway or agree with them or NOT agree with them or NOT meet them halfway is a personal preference with no intrinsic virtue *IF* there is no God.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

Please provide me with the logical proof that an objective moral system requires a God.

You might want to send a copy to any of a number of philosophical journals, because if your proof is valid and correct, then it will be among the greatest accomplishments in philosophical history.

As a starting point, you might want to come up with an answer to this age old question:

Euthyphro Dilemma