Personally, I'd say you can't be moral without reason to fear not being moral, and add one could easily argue that those morals are defined by the fear in the first place. We aren't taught "Stealing is wrong", we're really taught "Stealing and getting caught leads to punishment, so don't steal 'cause then you'll never get caught"...
I disagree strongly with this. While the logical part of my brain is willing to admit that, without consequences there is no good reason to be moral, the rest of me can't help but think that "If I stab this person on the street, and everyone followed the same logic as me, the entire species would die out." I follow a personal moral code that goes something like this:
#1 - Perform actions which maximise the benefit to all sentient organisms.
#2 - If an action/inaction would have no effect on the planet/universe as a whole, then act for the maximum benefit of the human species.
#3 - If an action/inaction would have no effect on the species, then act for the maximum benefit of the largest group of people.
#4 - If an action/inaction would have no effect on other people, then act for the maximum benefit of myself.
I have formulated this simply based on the fact that if there is an optimal moral code, it must be valid when applied to EVERYONE. If I were to stab someone, then there is no good reason for anyone else not to do the same (unless I acted illogically, in which case I am in error). I'm 99% sure that this version of utilitarianism is considerably more robust and ethical than ANY religious code, and in fact, if logic and reason are applied correctly then a much better moral code can be created and adhered to.
As for my motivations for caring any other organisms other than myself: Spoilered because of off-topic rant.
Simply put, life is the only bit of order in a universe of chaos and entropy. Life is pretty much the only process which ever has a chance of preventing either a big-crunch scenario where the universe collapses into a lump of energy, or heat-death where the universe slowly cools down and dies. Sure, we might not be able to do much about it after all, but at least while we still have energy we can continue to learn and understand. Without life to observe it there seems little point to anything, so preserving organisms simply makes sense. Also, it seems a waste to destroy 4 billion years of evolution.