I do definatly agree that just because you are of an evil race, goblin and ogre, that you are automatically evil.
I think that stance makes it easier from a rule based game to make the alignment problem more cut and dry, but from a realistic case it, well, isn't.
I considered this. Alignments right now for the DM goblin = evil. You detect evil, see a goblin it is evil. Cut and dry, no worries for the DM, not moral dilemna for the PCs, just kill it.
If you were to take away that cut and dry decision that puts it all on the DM to define who and/or what is evil. No longer is every blahblah evil, they must now know what god the player worships and what creatures that this god believes are evil. The rules just got multiplied times however many gods there are in the game. Just added a huge bit of complexity to the game system.
If you go the direction of evil intentions/actions = evil, then it still puts more decision making on the DM. Are the evil, just selfish? How do I show an alignment check to this person? How do they actually compare to the person casting? If the caster is selfish then do they see themselves as partially evil. Maybe they just have evil thoughts like Minority Report but haven't acted on them yet. How far do you go with that. It will be arbitrary and change depending on the circumstances and on what the DM is thinking.
Goblin = Evil just simplifies everything. But I agree there are still problems with it. (Like I have said in other threads, Palladium at least divides the alignments in a more realistice way).
If the DM is good enough, and willing enough, then you can go the extra mile. But for a good majority that don't have good goblins, it is just the easy way out.