I popped over to read it. It's mostly standard creo fair blowing all of the typical dog-whistles:
The controversy exists because evolutionists, led by academia's far-left, along with the secular elite opinion-makers, have decreed that questioning of evolution is not allowed, that it is only an attempt to inject religion or creationism into the classroom.Yawn. Heard it before.
This line, however, caught my eye:
The first step is to define science in a way that is satisfactory to both sides.Umm. OK... might I point out, hopefully without undue emphasis,
A wise man once said "You don't have to respect both sides of an argument when one side is a load of crap." Creationists are not owed some sort of concession to their vapid theology insofar as how science is defined. Science is what is, and tough titties if that doesn't fit into your mythos. Scientists investigate and describe the natural world on its own terms, without the pesky interference of miracles and fairies and folklore. And what they do does not intrinsically have anything to do with your religion: any incompatability between the two is not the result of "left-wing secular" anything. It has to do with the fact that your belief system does not accurately describe reality.
Your religion has nothing to bring to the science table, so you have no say in how it's defined or conducted. Sorry, you lose.