>>Besides the fact that your bias against religion is obvious, you seem to discount that fact that humping anything is site leads to obvious social breakdowns.
>
>Breakdowns? I'd imagine people would probably be happier and less irritable if this was the case!
>
>>Free love isn't free. Neither is irresponsible sex.
>
>Irresponsible? Please define this, I'm dying to hear your answer.
>
>Regardless, if birth control and contraceptives were not frowned upon for some selfish or controlling reasons particular institutions have used and were more than readily avialable, what adverse consequences would consensual protected intercourse produce?

Happier people and one less activity for religion to "protect" us from. The first doesn't really serve religion (why would one aspire to heavenly happiness if they are happy here?), at least as the preachers see it. The second leaves a list that may be too short.
These are "adverse consequences" to organized religion.