I've read it, and I may still have it around someplace if I haven't given it away. I makes many interesting and sound points, it's chief failing in my opinion, is that Harris seems to set out to derive 'an ought from an is', and does not succeed at that. He provides some interesting insights on how to leverage an 'ought' to an 'is' with the aid of another 'is'.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.