Having flown the Airbus, I think many of the criticisms levelled at the FBW systems originate from those who have never used them. One of the favourite criticisms is that people operate the system, not the aircraft. I have several thousand hours of A320 time, yet have never activated a FBW protection or been constrained by one. I suspect the same holds true for the vast majority of Airbus drivers. It is a myth that people fly around assuming that because the FBW permits it then it must be safe. People fly the aircraft around within normal operating parameters, just as they would a non-FBW aircraft. Get the speed too close to the limits on an Airbus and you'll get the same response from the pilots as you would if they were flying any other type. If you are the sort of pilot who flies around deliberately trying to reach those limits then you don't belong in any aircraft.
Much is also made of the regression from Normal to Alternate law. Bearing in mind what I've written above, it really is no big deal. So what if you don't have the protections of Normal law? You don't need them. The aircraft handles the same (load factor demand in pitch axis from the sidestick, roll rate demand in the roll axis). Fly the aircraft the way you flew it before and you won't see any difference until such time as you lower the landing gear and switch to Direct law. Take it to the extremes without protections and you are in no different a situation to being in a conventional aircraft, except it's easier to recover in a Airbus.
The FBW system is not designed to make the aircraft safe to fly, hence it doesn't need to know your intentions. It's the pilots' job to keep the aircraft safe and the regression of the control laws allows them to safely control the aircraft during reasonable manouevres.