We can make mistakes about what we ought to do, and these are not the same as making bad decisions about what to do.

I don't think Kant's theory looks bad to people except insofar as they have misunderstood it (for instance, as heartless and ironheaded, or as committed to an absurd metaphysical conception of freedom that violates Kant's own philosophy).

Kant takes a free will to be a being or substance with the power to cause a state of the world (or a whole series of such states) spontaneously or from itself.

Consequentialist theories begin with a very simple and undoubtedly valid point: Every action aims at a future end, and is seen as a means to it.

Kant does represents a distinctively modern view of the human condition in contrast to that of ancient high culture, found in ancient Greek ethics and also in ancient Chinese ethics.

Kant was a rational theologian. He did not pretend to be a biblical or revealed theologian.

Sometimes when a philosopher's views are widely rejected by the world, the fault is not with the philosopher but with the world.