That depends on their individual choices on any given day. Again, its not a group think.

nope decent humans stay decent

DEAR SIR, I have read your manuscript with some attention. By the argument it contains against a particular Providence, though you allow a general Providence, you strike at the foundations of all religion. For without the belief of a Providence, that takes cognizance of, guards, and guides, and may favor particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection. I will not enter into any discussion of your principles, though you seem to desire it. At present I shall only give you my opinion, that, though your reasonings are subtile and may prevail with some readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general sentiments of mankind on that subject, and the consequence of printing this piece will be, a great deal of odium drawn upon yourself, mischief to you, and no benefit to others. He that spits against the wind, spits in his own face. But, were you to succeed, do you imagine any good would be done by it? You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life, without the assistance afforded by religion; you having a clear perception of the advantages of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possessing a strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations. But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security. And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is, to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain a rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother. I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it. I intend this letter itself as a proof of my friendship, and therefore add no professions to it; but subscribe simply yours, B. Franklin https://wallbuilders.com/benjamin-franklins-letter-thomas-paine/

That depends on the religion and on the moral values it teaches (or fails to teach). We can - for example - credit Christianity with the eradication of legalized child prostitution throughout the World (well...maybe only most of the World). That's not solely due to Christianity, but due to the combination of Christianity's intolerance of that particular act PLUS the widespread cultural influence of Christian morality that resulted from the Age of Exploration, the Age of Colonization and the Industrial Age. To say that another way: the common Christian "rule" against child prostitution became cultural/moral taboo in Christian-dominated nations, and when some of those nations gained a dominating cultural influence worldwide, that particular cultural/moral taboo spread with the rest of the cultural influence, such that the practice - formerly legal in very many cultures around the world - has been virtually wiped out (legally, that is). *** But take - for a counterexample - Aum Shinrikyo. Members of THAT religion committed terrorist acts DIRECTLY BECAUSE of the religion's teachings. In that case: it can be argued that the religion made the members MORE morally corrupt (at least in the general area of "committing terrorist acts"). *** SO: I conclude that religion can cause it's members - or even it's non-members - to be more, or less, or equally corrupt, depending on the religion and on its influence on social morality.

Without Religion, would people become more, less or be equally morally corrupt? Your question is a quandary. Has religion really helped? look at the history of mankind with whatever religion you want and compare that to the wars, corruption, famine, disasters that has been done in the name of religion. So I don't think it matters if religion is involved or not. So for me morality doesn't come from a religion , but from your relationship with God, and following his requirements.

Without religion people would be less corrupt. Religion is the cause of some of the violence in people due to their hatred and anger towards anyone who is different to them. Religion corrupts the mind making the religious weirdo turn against anyone different to them such as atheists who would get a hard time. Religion takes away a person’s sense of morality and reality. Religious weirdos don’t realise what they are doing wrong by making others believe what they believe in which is being a psychological bully. Just because someone is different to you does not mean you should make them become you. We are all individual humans with rights and feelings which religious weirdos don’t think about because they are control freaks involved in their own head that do not think of others feelings and rights. People are better off without religion because they would be in tune with the natural world and not as hateful and angry towards different people. That way there would be less corruption and more freedom in yourself rather than be a stressed out religious weirdo causing psychological damage.