Is morality a result of natural weakness ?

You should know that Nietzsche doesn't tell the truth.

I'd argue that morality is the result of evolution. Getting along with one and other, empathy and altruism are all contributors to a healthy, successful community. Back in the day if individuals disregarded others feelings and were soley selfish in their endevours they were less likely to survive the cruelties of nature than if they worked together. Morality it seems could well have evolved from this need to be sypathetic to others in order to protect oneself (safety in numbers and that shizzle) a sort of primative social contract if yu like. This being the case, adhering to moral rules and conventions could be seen as a sign of strength, a desirable characteristic to pass on to the next generation.

Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior")

morality means a code of conduct or belief which is held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong. Morals are arbitrarily created and subjectively defined by society, philosophy, religion, and/or individual conscience.

i dont think they are result of natural weakness

Morality is not an indication of weakness but a proof of strength.

"Rudeness is weak man's imitation of strength" - Eric Hoffer

To be moral is to do be a person of strong foundation within.

To me morality is a result of allowing God to give you strength to do what He has commanded of all of us.

Or...vice versa;

Morality is one result ....of "natural" strength.

I fail to see how a man who was weak might be able to convince those who were strong to show morality.

Doesn't make sense, technically speaking.

No, it is ability to see things from the other persons point of view. However, the less educated would have problems with "Jut ad bello" which is justice in war.