Morality has a high survival value, it is easy to understand why it could have evolved. Some prairie dogs appoint themselves sentinals of the tribe, and draw preditors onto themselves by barking out early warnings. Why? Some wolves give up their mating priviliges during lean times so the alpha pair can get enough resources for their pups. Why?
I've seen film of a family of meerkats that nearly died of hunger rather than leave one of their number that had been wounded and was dying. And a pack of wolves has been observed mourning for six weeks after one of them was killed by a cougar.
If, by morality in its deepest sense, you mean putting the interests of others ahead of one's own, then it is common among social animals -- either by evolution or by design.
;^)
The utility for the species is undeniable. It is also quite clear that not all humans actually feel compassion or empathy (despite presidential claims to the contrary). For the non-compassionate, a bit of prodding in the form of written rules is necessary.
For the non-compassionate, a bit of prodding is a futile exercise. They need to be reborn into better families. Nothing short of that has much of a track record in reforming amateur or professional sociopaths.
Those who think it's peachy scaring people into morality or compassion by threatening them with hell if they don't--and holding out the carrot of heaven if they do--follow the written rules, are engaged in wishful thinking of mind-boggling dimension, in my humble opinion. That's not morality--that's an invitation to have a culture based on hypocrisy. Did you know that most financially successful men in the Western christian world serruptitiously cheat on their wives according to Kinsey et. al.? Isn't that great? Isn't that they kind of thing we want our children to imbibe? Isn't that a fantastic basis for intergender trust and co-operation?