You can be moral/or immoral without religion. . .just as someone can be moral/immoral *with* religion (as is evident by crimes of various degrees committed by clergy, etc).
If you used religion *only* as a guide to morality you'll be **** up a creek - many religions can't agree on what is 'moral' and 'right' - as is evident by all the examples I've given in this thread. . . but there are many other examples that don't even touch on social-stigmas and sins (like murder, rape, etc)
Did you know that in the Weslyan Church dancing is disgraceful and immoral - so my parents discouraged us from doing it - completely.
But in many other Christian-nominations dancing is fine and even encouraged (group dance night, etc).
So when my Dad transferred from the Weslyan Church to the Methodist Church - he then had to explain to us all the different things we now could do (or couldn't do) in order to cleave to the Church's decision of what was 'morally acceptable' for the flock.
Isn't that just the stupidest damn thing? Two different nominations of the same faith claiming that things are immoral/moral at the same time.
If religion had more of a hold we'd even be more confused as a society - so, no, I don't look to any faith or religion to tell me what's moral or immoral. Certain things are inherently unacceptable regardless of what religions you believe/don't believe in - because human nature and society says so.
But, even then, you can look at different societies and cultures and come away with differences in morality - like family constructs (what to permit your kids to do: drink or don't drink) . . . is it acceptable to be nude in front of your children? (nudists VS non-nudists) . . . and so on.