I'm not sure I understand your question.

Is it generally: "What happens if science proves that (uncomfortable reality to liberal minded people) is true?"

Science doesn't dictate public policy as much as people think it does. Most of society's feelings and attitudes are drawn from people's upbringing and general gut feelings.

I think the answer is that "society would respond in a capricious and emergent manner to that news, and depending on preexisting social attitudes, would change slightly."

I doubt we will get to a point anytime soon where studies have such an impact on society that they ramp up everyone into a reactive fury.

Our ability to act as moral agents is most likely a result of evolutionary psychology, as empathy for other members of your social group increases social cohesion and thus odds for survival.

I suppose you might be talking about a situation where we engineer that out or something, but I don't know.

I also don't think that all atheists are of the red-faced internet variety, just like how the straw man depiction of "Scientists" in right wing religious/left wing woo ideology is wrong. Most scientists enjoy their tiny slice of their field, are genuinely interested in obtaining more knowledge and uncovering mysteries, and are mostly just annoyed that everyone else seems to assert their knowledge baselessly.

I am a geologist, so it bothers me when left wingy woo people lecture me about the power of crystals and other things relating to geology that they learned from a 10 minute youtube video. Obviously when I talk to them, they get defensive and turn me into the ego maniacal straw man scientist who is there to stamp out "curiosity", but in reality they have just been convinced of a comforting piece of fiction.

Personally, I would love it if my rock collection actually helped me chakra, but as there is no evidence that any of that is real, I am content with them looking cool on my shelf.

The same goes with any other branch of science. Each individual scientist usually rests comfortably upon their small niche of expertise, and generally assumes that other scientists of other branches do the same. They are all plagued by their own internal biases like everyone else, but I have met very very few who have these crazy, psychotic agendas that all scientists are constantly painted with.

When it comes to religion, people like myself usually just remain patently unconvinced is all, and only really respond with a ton of fervor when we are confronted with people asserting their "truth" aggressively in our faces.