Some standard religious misconceptions (and how to expose them)

• You can't disprove god

Ah, that's an easy one, abundantly and eloquently addressed by Dawkins et al. To sum it up:

Most things cannot be diproved, this doesn't make them real.

For instance I cannot disprove toothfairies, this doesn't mean their existence is as likely as their non-existence.
The likelihood for the existence of toothfairies, or any kind of supernatural entity, is equally low and can be safely neglected, given that there isn't a hint of evidence for them.

• Big bang is evidence for god

 Again, I think the best answer here is Dawkins's one. Debating with a theologian who was thundering that the Genesis had made one stunning prediction: that the universe had been created -that it had a single origin in space-time- Dawkins answered something like:

"Well either it has been created or it has not. Flip a coin and call a side, 

you'll be right 50% of the time"

Being at chance level fails to be impressive.
Moreover, I would like to mention that not all researchers buy the big bang theory. The endless universe alternative is alive and supported by foremost physicists.

• Fine tuning is evidence for god

Yep, that's a hard one, I think the most difficult. It is reminiscent of creationists argument on the eye complexity. If you can't invoke the theory of evolution, it is very hard to understand how such complexity could have come into existence without a designer. But once evolution is discovered the eye makes perfect sense (just watch this stunning video, hum again by Dawkins, well he's very good at busting these arguments), In fact the eye has been invented independently by dozens of species, and frankly the human one is not so well designed..

So the answer for fine tuning, here again, is very probably evolution. The inflationary scenario seems to come with eternal inflation, which would produce tens of thousands of googles of bubble universes, each of which would have a different tuning.  Other researchers have advocated a kind of cosmological natural selection mediated by black-holes -they would be the place where other baby universes are created.

• Religion provides moral guidance

 Well that is, when it doesn't tell you to kill people. Plenty of things provide moral guidance. Introspection, friendship, benevolent work..The point is:

 Why not look for a kind of moral guidance where you actually don't have to buy the whole "belief-without-evidence" package

• From the theist: Quitting my religion would hurt people I love

Well, if you feel like quitting, you're already sick with preaches and cult and nonsensical arguments and bigotry etc.., and you already feel bad because you participate or silently consent to all this sick business.

So first: you should stop hurting yourself and quit.

Then peacefully explain to your religious relatives and friends that you cannot keep on hurting yourself.
People who really love you will understand and accept your new difference.  The others..well these were relationships probably not much worth cultivating anyway.

• From the atheist: not going to some religious ceremonies would hurt people I love

Idem!