Crispin Sartwell has a piece in the NY Times: What's So Good About Original Sin? He says, "I would like to entertain the notion that a secularized conception of original sin is plausible, and that believing it might have good effects. In short, perhaps it’s time for a new Puritanism, though with fewer witch trials this time around."
I wonder if this philosophy professor has any familiarity with evolutionary psychology. Yes, as Paul said in Romans, we do things we hate and we don't do things we want. But original sin seems a less plausible explanation than natural selection of variations. To borrow from Jesse Jackson: In "his" continuing creation, God simply isn't finished with us yet.