jar writes:
What I have said is that it is not necessary to be part of any religion to be moral, and that morality is NOT simply a creation of some religion but rather a social contract that evolves over time.
I agree with this jar, although I am sure you know that I allow morality to be more than ONLY a social contract. I think you do as well, but yes, when you express one thing, people will jump on you and say; 'well, if your religion isn't about morality, what is it?'
What I do want to say, in regards to the OP, is that morality could very quickly become religious.
Men could trade something for something. Good for survival.
Men could look at the sun, and say, I will sacrifice something to the sun in order to gain something physical. Not so good for survival.
but religion is born.
Then, I will sacrifice something to the sun in order to gain something invisible, like immortality.
I will sacrifice something physical to something invisible (a god) in order to gain something invisible or physical.
I will sacrifice something invisible to something invisible to gain something invisible.
Things with obvious benefits, like trades, are not so much thought of as moral. They are simply intelligent choices. Things where the benefit is based on faith in the productivity of the action, are moral. The idea now is that sacrificing anything to something invisible is pointless without real productivity.