Atheism: A Philosophical Justification

I like what Dr. Peterson said about framing a debate in a manner someone else would agree with. If I were to define atheism as a philosophy is that my mind is sacred in being able to behave courteously, respectfully to be able to see reality and to act on my own behalf at the preference of myself at the expense of an authority if my survival and an authority's survival is in contradiction then I must do what I can to harmonize both interests but should negotiations fail I have a moral responsibility to value my life before the legitimacy of an authority. In that my definition isn't just factual in whether God exists or not but it's pivitol on the Problem of Evil that presents a logical Argument from Evil that logical refutes theism as a mode of being rather than a factual claim. If God exists and is in part of a divine plan, then one would have to defer to authority and structure when one's own well being was in question then one had to submit to suffering in the face of mysterious circumstances beyond control of the individual as a moral agent. But if I am an atheist which by my definition I am, then God is logically incompatible with living a good life. And that's why I only live harmoniously with myself first and human beings as a close second as far as I respect their autonomy and my own and my priority to me first is in relationship to my own autonomy first which is an intimacy factor not heirarchy. This naturally excludes God if God isn't a human being capable of human relationships. I borrowed Michael Martin's title for his book.