It depends on the religion in question, and on the church in question, and on the specific group of religious people in question. Some have good outcomes and some bad outcomes.
And almost no one gets by fine without some sort of moral community with a list of agreed-upon guidelines, other than sociopaths. They may not think those guidelines are imparted to them by an infallible deity, but in most cases their firmly-held moral beliefs are equally unjustified, and vaguely explained with phrases like "that's how I was brought up" or "it's just obviously right, everyone can see that", which are again just references to similarly-minded moral communities. If you ask someone why they hold moral view X almost no one is going to go, "well, after reading Kant's 'Critique of Practical Reason', I came to the conclusion that in cases like this..."
The particular problem with religious justification for morality is that in the context of many religions it's a) supposedly infallible, and the closer you get to "no one may question my belief about what's right" the more damage you do; and b) fear based; i.e., "follow these strict guidelines or you will go to hell / bad things will follow / your crops won't grow", which is a good way to trick people into doing some fairly insane things that they otherwise would see as obviously insane.
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
|