Skeptic, I was going to go digging for more quotations about love from sources even earlier than the ones I've already given, but now I see that it's a futile exercise. You're practicing a variation on the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy: If something good comes from a non-Christian source, you cross out that source and write in "Jesus" in crayon. Conversely, if something bad comes from a Christian source you play the No True Scotsman card by claiming the source doesn't "really" represent Christianity as you understand it.
If you're going to define "Christian" as "stuff Skeptic likes," and lump everything you don't like under atheism, paganism or "OMG Demons!!!111!!!one!!111" there's simply no point in either of us using terms like Christian or atheist.
Let's talk instead this dichotomy you've created regarding the source of human morality and emotions: Either it's "bag of chemicals" or it's "Goddidit."
Now consider, please, that humanity on the whole is more good than bad, with increasing lifespans and an ever-increasing knowledge base. That is in line with evolution, both genetic and cultural, as traits such as cooperative behaviours and intelligence translate into success in today's world. There's also a clear correlation between education and quality of life, and also between recognition of women's rights and quality of life. These latter two are cultural rather than genetic, but I think it's safe to say that they're not particularly religious either.
Contrast that with your "God has written on all our hearts" hypothesis. Don't you think that something coming from a god should work a bit more consistently? Traits like psychopathy (in which someone is pathologically devoid of empathy) simply should not exist under your scheme.