Religion mainly teaches people morality (and fear). Thing is: between two individuals that respect each other, morality will form because you'll probably want to keep in each others' lives. But between two individuals that either don't know or respect each other, why would I want to act morally just and be nice?
It seems to me that morality as a systematised set of rules is mainly for weak people to not get fucked. So they try to force other people in adopting morality as if it were a right. Sorry, but no one has a right to anything and no one has the absolute right to respect.
In the same regard, climate change debate. Yes, climate change exists. And it seems that we probably do contribute. But the big question is: do I care? Do I care about my future offspring that won't have to deal with this for generations to come? Maybe. But do I trust people that I don't know to be as co-dependent as I am in reaching this goal? Do I invest in a luxury not knowing if they'll do the same?
Mind you, we're a competitive species and sooner or later someone will want to climb to the top, and the easiest way to do so is just ignore climate change (e.g. China). It's like a zero-sum game, because trust can't just be given to everyone.
I believe strong men don't live by religion or morality, because they're strong. Of course this doesn't mean that you get to #metoo the shit out of everyone, because even in the most selfish way that'll affect you, but we don't need a set of morals to do what we think is best. We affirm ourselves in this world and enforce strong boundaries because we know that's the best way to determine whether someone's worthy of our trust.
By the way, I use weak and strong as terms for different sets of people. It's amoral, but it's there nonetheless. We're a species of social primates, and, yes, we have hierarchies of competence / fitness that reflect our chances of survival and reproduction.
*It's just a thought, feel free to comment, bash, elaborate to your liking.