[Cerril]

Yes and no. Moral law needs to have a reason for its existence. If there is an absolute right and wrong, then you need to be able to answer the question 'why?'

However, that answer doesn't necessitate a deity per se. In fact, a natural moral law (to use a term from another post) would have good as its own entity.

Unfortunately things get even hazier from this point forward. You need to answer what 'Good' is and why that is so. A utilitarian defines Good in terms of what will provide the most benefit for the largest number of people (and usually 'benefit' is defined in terms of happiness). Under his morality, there is a right thing to do in every circumstance and it is absolute, but there is no deity.

You are correct in one of your observations, though, that because morality must at some level be defined, the ones who define it open themselves up to question. A deity eliminates the need to question things (though questioning His translators becomes an option, obviously).

In my own little world, my morality is based on reason given some assumptions that are unreasonable on the surface but which hold up surprisingly well under close scrutiny. That said, my 'morality' is only there to govern my actions and interactions and I don't expect anyone else to follow it just because I say so, I would need to convince them (or they would need to find it on their own).