Nice, but the statements and choices are inaccurate. I'm an atheist.
Now:
"Belief in a God is foolish without direct evidence" - I chose True and got a bullet, because before I said I believed in evolution. But isn't it a bit of a catch-22?
False then? I wouldn't say it with those words ("foolish" - I hate to call people foolish en masse) , but I believe in observation. Evolution has been observed. God hasn't been observed (yet?). Of course, observation is not a mathemathical proof. You can let an apple fall a thousand times, but there is no proof that the apple will not float in the air the 1001th time. Same for God. If any God (with which I mean: some spiritual power that is more powerful than a human) shows himself or some effects, I'll believe. I've seen the effects of gravity.
Then this one:
"The serial rapist Peter Sutcliffe had a firm, inner conviction that God wanted him to rape and murder prostitutes. He was, therefore, justified in believing that he was carrying out God's will in undertaking these actions."
What do you mean by "justified", oh automated sniper? His beliefs don't justify his actions. No way. But I don't condemn him on his beliefs. To me, anybody can believe what he or she wants. I condemn him because of his actions. Should I take true or false, then?
I took the direct hit there... probably because of a misunderstanding... If not, please hit me again.