First, while an individual exists, his main priority is to survive, otherwise there's no possibility of performing no other act of lesser priority. Any other priority is secondary. If one wants to be a doctor, go to the cinema or get sex, one first needs to be alive.
Second, any system of behavioral regulation, like morals, ethics, law, religion, etc. is intended to increase the probabilities of the group survival. If we have a law or moral rules, it is not to punish and exclude people, it is just to prevent others from decreasing the probabilities of group survival.
Third, in a group, the group survival has a larger priority than individual survival, due to simple democracy. For example, if a murderer needs to be eliminated, his most important priority is to survive, but the group's most important priority will also be to survive by killing him. Therefore, the group priority prevails by applying democracy (the majority decided) and the killer is condemned to death.
Knowing that, you can easily conclude that each individual is compelled by ethics (and morals, and religion, etc.) to do something for the group survival. The law does not require that, but it requires not to do something that risks the group survival.
In addition, "doing something" means being constructive. Doing something implies constructing something that increases the group survival probabilities. Or destroying something that risks the group.
In consequence, yes, morals, ethics or religion demands you to do something constructive. Law does not enforce constructive acts, but prevents destruction by punishing them.