I don't think religions are the end-all be-all of morals. I'm sure that if there were no religions, we'd still have morals, there just wouldn't be a belief system based on deities.
Here's where there's a bit of a problem though, because if we take christian beliefs about creation into account, we were created by God (I'm not sure what the other creation beliefs are of other religions).
But looking at it from an evolution perspective, all animals interact with one another to survive. Some animals are social beings, creating groups that interact with one another, such as humans. The main point of life (from evolution standpoint) is to procreate and continue the species. If an animal is a social being, the groups work out certain ways to behave in order to insure the continuation of the group. Hunting methods, feeding methods, behavioural methods, all of these are built by the animals in order to insure success. They are in effect morals used to govern the group. No deities involved.
Of course, humans have surpassed this type of living, and now we don't really rely on each other as much in order to survive. It's no longer the survival of the group that we worry about, but the survival of ourselves.
But like I said, the problem with using this as an explanation of morals is that it's bringing in two different systems, both with views as to how we were created...by God, or by natural evolution. which makes this debate a bit of a conundrum.