Yes.

Morality is entrenched in law and law drives morals.

Law and morality may differ in various society. In hinduism and chrisianity practicising countries polygamy is not allowed, but for muslims------

If the truth of a fact is unique in all characteristic, necessarily law and morality must be united for regulating the same facts. If each religion has its own morality it is an index that only one religion can be true, if each party has its own policy it is an index of democracy fails in its basis.

Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people whom we personally dislike.

- Oscar Wilde

"Morality is more important than laws, because law depends on morality"

- Edmund Burke 

In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so.

- Immanuel Kant

Yes, there is a necessary connection between law and morality. 

     There is something of great metaphysical potential. Generally speaking, we expect a lot from people and are not happy if they betray us. In fact, our entire culture is predicated on the idea that each person has an indefinite and intrinsic worth. The implicit proposition in our legal structure is that even no matter who you are that there is something about you that is of transcendent value that has to be respected by the law and other people. You can ask if you really believe this, and you can answer that based on your behavior in your level of following the law. It is the belief that all have intrinsic transcendent worth, and this is not easily pulled out from the law without it falling apart. The understanding that you have intrinsic transcendent worth is predicated on the biblical knowledge that humans have a "logos" nature, that they have the ability to speak forth their being forward.

     Being involved in the speaking forth of our being is something about us that needs to be respected. There is a sanctity of life, a recognition of transcendent value, in the practice of law which can only be related to morals. For even the vicious criminal has a touch of transcendence which we respect. If not, you have a very barbaric legal system because no one is protected. As soon as you make a mistake in your life, you become the damned and have no rights whatsoever and this is not what is happening in the west. Morals, then, have a very crucial role in law. It allows one to hold out their hand to invoke one's best if that is going to be given. It is the transcendent part of you making a gesture to allow the transcendent part of me to step forth. This happens all the time.

     Unlike postmodernist thought, man's universal experience has shown man to have an essential nature. There is a sanctity of life, a recognition of transcendent value, in the practice of law which can only be related to morals. Man's existence in his essential nature is shown, in part, through his transcendence and moral capacity in which he is shown to create and construct law, however so differential from other societies

Law is often compared and contrasted with particular moral judgments.

Dennis

Dennis Mazur

>>Is there a necessary connection between law and morality?

>>Or are there simply contingent connections between the two?

It is an interesting and important question having long history, and numerous aspects and facets. I encountered an excellent short essay (about a one or two pages) that covers theories, real life cases, and schools of thoughts:

https://www.ukessays.com/essays/philosophy/connections-between-law-and-morality-philosophy-essay.php 

Connections Between Law And Morality Philosophy Essay

Print Reference this

Published: 23rd March, 2015

Examples of immoral laws and also of laws, whether moral or immoral, being legally enforced in immoral ways, are plentiful. Moreover, some laws are clearly morally better than others. So the relationship between laws or legal systems and morality looks contingent.

However, if one prescinds from actual human laws or legal systems, and considers so-called "Natural Law", a necessary connection might be unearthed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

Hi kirk- the question you are raising is the difference ( very simply) between legal positivism and ' natural law'. Legal positvism states that the law is not moral- it is a social convention dictated to keep communities running- and has no morality per se at its heart.  Natural law states thta law and morality are necessary bed fellows

The following article may be helpful

Laws are based on power.  The connection between law and morality is contingent on whether those with the power to make laws value morality and that is not logically necessary.  Although appearing to base the laws on morality may help them be accepted and therefore can add to the power of the ones making law, presenting laws as based on morality to increase acceptance of laws is immoral.   

Law shoud be defined by the real problems no by interest. Check the Catalonia problem in Spain right now

It should be. In religion it occurs in such way.

The law makes us conscient of the sin, but the grace through the sacraments saves us of the condemnation for the mortal sins or of the hard reparation in the purgatory of leve sins committed in this life.

Yes, because by the means of  morality , societies or  communitiesconsecrate their own   protected legal assets. Those legal assets are the foundations to construct the legal corpus of these societies.