I 'called in' to Role Play Rescue - a podcast I hugely recommend, with a response to the bonus episode on good & evil. Here's what I said:
I dumped alignments in my game a long time ago, but only because I never saw how they could contribute to a game. I think the main problem I had with the alignment system, besides simply being superfluous, was that they tended to be prescriptive, rather than descriptive. So if I had a lawful good cleric and that cleric did something a lawful good person wouldn't do, suddenly there was a problem. 'You can't do that', was possible. 'Your character wouldn't do that' was more likely, but... hey, can't characters have arcs? Can't they change? Can't they act irrationally? The concept is too fluid to make into a jello mold, at least for me. If that weren't enough, the idea of alignment languages seemed ... well... Come again? I never really got it, and I can easily say I have never missed dropping it from my rules set. It's not to say there is no good and evil in my games - there is - I just don't see any good reason to put it on my character sheet.