You can proclaim the “right” to privacy as loudly as you want, but no one behind one of the great firewalls will hear you if your HTTPS-only site is summarily blocked. You are not giving these people privacy, you are taking away their access to information.
And there are also large parts of the earth that do not enjoy to the low latency links that we righteous protocol dictators take for granted. HTTPS (and /2) kill local caches and force EVERY page to be re-transmitted to the individual browser rather than served locally. A primary school student sitting at the other end of a 128Kbps down-link in sub-Saharan Africa does not care that the Wikipedia article that she is trying to pull up would have been encrypted for her safety… because she never sees it. Her school bandwidth allotment was exhausted hours ago by the previous 25 students who pulled up redundantly-downloaded copies of that same article earlier that day.
If you care about offering privacy to the people who actually want it, why not give people a choice between HTTP and HTTPS and let users pick which way they want to (or must) access your site? Be careful anytime you find yourself by restricting other peoples’ choices based on your beliefs - especially other people you’ve never met who live in situations very different than yours.