Morality and Religion

I am sure this is going to be the hundredth thread dealing with this issue, but I think that I still have to say something on it.
Today I was given a newspaper by a member of local Christian sect. As most of the literature of that kind, it emphasises the necessity to believe to be moral, that "unbelievers are generally less moral than believers"... So I should like to discuss whether it is really so, or rather I should like to share my own experiences.
Obviously so-called religious people think they are more moral because they obey to a certain set of rules given by their teachers and books. But why do they? Is it that the existence of God, Judge or the law of karma make them behave morally? If yes, then another question is why? So as to get a place in paradise or better rebirth? If that's the case, then their morality is nothing but a humiliation of a weak before a powerful, that is cowardice and in my opinion has nothing to do with morality. If not, then why do we need the belief in so much?
What I should like to share is that I discovered that to be moral there is no need to believe in anything. The only thing needed, is to follow one's heart, one's nature. Doing this I realised that abstinence from sex or from alcohol, drugs, meat, killing, stealing has happiness within itself, because it raises human over this world of struggle, this world of suffering. It's not even abstinence, "abstinence" is a rude word, because it implies so-called struggle against desires. But when we realise our true nature and the value of others, there is no even choice, we just live. Perhaps what I am saying here sounds much like a sermon, but I have a difficulty to put it more clearly. Perhaps I should illustrate that with an example. Many believers accuse atheists that they are lechers. I am not a believer, but I found that for me to have pure relationships with a girl is much better than trying to get in her bed, and these pure relationships is not a compulsion which I lay upon myself because of belief, it's just that it is better for me to behave like that. I do that because I feel it is much more pleasant than use another person for my so-called necessities. Therefore I call that following one's own nature.

If it is true that non-believers are less moral it is because those believers belong to a community, and community is morality... It is impossible for an individual alone, living alone, outside of a community to be moral...Morality, as a form, as all forms, is a form of relationship... To belong to any community one must be moral, and people may hide their immorality, but they are only as much members as they accept the community morality...

masturbation is not a crime against other persons, but I find that disgusting and immoral,

masturbation is not a crime

relationships with a girl is much better

I personally find the notion of morality to be absurd. I know of no objective standard which can be advanced to justify what is called morality, nor any universal truths. Were it so that there were universal truths underlying morality, then all religions would believe in exactly the same moral codes, and clearly they do not.

Religious devotion and universal truths are not necessary to the adoption of ethical standards which reflect an individual's ideas of justice and rectitude, and pragmatism can afford a basis for ethical behavior for communities. For example, murder denies to the victims the justice upon which a successful community will rely to assure peace and prosperity among its members. Prohibiting murder affords a principle of equality of personal security to all members of a group adhering to a social contract, and does so without appeal to imaginary friend superstitions or egregious claims about universal truths. Human historical experience also shows that prohibitions on or penalties for murder can be effective in curbing or preventing ruinous feuds which can destroy a community.

that which brings real happiness not found in worldly things.

How about following oneself?
This is not a strict argument for "universal standard" . . .

. . . but having read lots of books from different traditions, I found that in the very foundation they have the same.

This is disillusionment with the pursuit for happiness within worldly things, pleasures etc. and understanding that beyond this world of desires, brutality there lies something peaceful, pure, that which brings real happiness not found in worldly things.

But that's again not what I mean. Dostoevsky said somewhere: "I don't want to live in a society where it is prohibited to kill. I want to live in a society where it is permitted to kill, but no one does that". THAT will be true morality.

happiness within worldly things, pleasures etc. and understanding that beyond this world of desires, brutality there lies something peaceful, pure, that which brings real happiness not found in worldly things.

Eudaimon wrote:

How about following oneself?
This is not a strict argument for "universal standard" . . .

What ? ! ? ! ? It's not an argument at all for universal standards.

This is disillusionment with the pursuit for happiness within worldly things, pleasures etc. and understanding that beyond this world of desires, brutality there lies something peaceful, pure, that which brings real happiness not found in worldly things.

Morality implicitly (and in the case of claims of religious authority, explicitly) derives from universal truths. It is laughably absurd to suggest that morality can derive from individual opinion or preference. This is not to suggest that i agree that there is any morality founded on universal truths, only that if one's ethos is individually derived, it's not morality.

If it is true that non-believers are less moral it is because those believers belong to a community, and community is morality... It is impossible for an individual alone, living alone, outside of a community to be moral...Morality, as a form, as all forms, is a form of relationship... To belong to any community one must be moral, and people may hide their immorality, but they are only as much members as they accept the community morality...