If God is not the source of morality then where does it come from? Evolution of course.

Religious behavior may be the result of natural selection, in his view, shaped at a time when early human groups were competing with one another. “Those who found ways to bind themselves together were more successful,” he said.

Haidt came to recognize the importance of religion by a roundabout route. “I first found divinity in disgust,” he writes in his book “The Happiness Hypothesis.”

The emotion of disgust probably evolved when people became meat eaters and had to learn which foods might be contaminated with bacteria, a problem not presented by plant foods.

Disgust was then extended to many other categories, he argues, to people who were unclean, to unacceptable sexual practices and to a wide class of bodily functions and behaviors that were seen as separating humans from animals.

“Imagine visiting a town,” Haidt writes, “where people wear no clothes, never bathe, have sex 'doggie style' in public, and eat raw meat by biting off pieces directly from the carcass.”

He sees the disgust evoked by such a scene as allied to notions of physical and religious purity. Purity is, in his view, a moral system that promotes the goals of controlling selfish desires and acting in a religiously approved way.

Notions of disgust and purity are widespread outside Western cultures. “Educated liberals are the only group to say, 'I find that disgusting but that doesn't make it wrong,'” Haidt said.
Working with a graduate student, Jesse Graham, Haidt has detected a striking political dimension to morality. He and Graham asked people to identify their position on a liberal-conservative spectrum and then complete a questionnaire that assessed the importance attached to each of the five moral systems. (The test, called the moral foundations questionnaire, can be taken online, at www.YourMorals.org.)

They found that people who identified themselves as liberals attached great weight to the two moral systems protective of individuals — those of not harming others and of doing as you would be done by. But liberals assigned much less importance to the three moral systems that protect the group, those of loyalty, respect for authority and purity.
Conservatives placed value on all five moral systems but they assigned less weight than liberals to the moralities protective of individuals.

Haidt believes that many political disagreements between liberals and conservatives may reflect the different emphasis each places on the five moral categories.

This is a great article!

Some of you who have visited here before may know that I spend a lot of my time studying and comparing religions. But the thing that confused me as a youngster was what made people surrender logic for belief. It was much later that I started reading scientific explorations into how cultures formed and how religion may have been very useful, or even necessary, in creating stronger ties within different communities. And how those humans who were born genetically prone to accepting religion were more successful in ancient times.

I could literally talk about this subject all day, but I will end my post here with the suggestion that if you are interested you do some research and learn that much of what you believe to be "free will" may in fact simply be an accident of birth. It can be very humbling.