I agree with this comment except for the last part:

...it's important to point out how "God" isn't a good answer to those questions, but I think it's more important to point out the flawed thinking which leads to asking the questions in the first place.

I happen to think pointing out how "God" is a bad answer is actually more important.

Nonetheless, the other lesson -- that the laws of physics do not necessarily have to carve up reality the way your brain wants to -- is also important, and I think Eliezer exaggerates when he says that your answer is "every bit as terrible as the religious one". As Sean Carroll puts it:

Modern physics doesn’t describe the world in terms of “causes” and “effects.” It simply posits that matter...acts in accordance with certain dynamical laws, known as “equations of motion.”... a concept like “cause” doesn’t appear anywhere in the equations of motion themselves, nor in the specification of the type of matter being described; it is only an occasionally-appropriate approximation, useful to us humans in narrating the behavior of some macroscopic configuration of equation-obeying matter.