[holmesworcester]

There's also a very long history of ideas that were fundamental to scientific and societal progress being morally repugnant to a majority, initially.

Heliocentrism, democracy, etc.

Without some degree of freedom to violate the majority's morality (or even one's parents' morality!) without judgement, we should expect society to stagnate due to arbitrary lock-in of the status quo on any sufficiently controversial issue.

Privacy is great because it lets groups violate the majority's morality invisibly, without flagrantly disrupting the sense the majority has of there being a moral order.

Privacy gives you the upside of social innovation without the downside of a generalized, diminished belief in the morality of others (which can be a downward spiral for societal self-organization.)