EDIT: Just noticed, Haidt defends himself in the comments.

From there:

The debate is whether group-level selection GS) played ANY role, or whether everything about our moral/political/religious lives can be explained straightforwardly, without contortions, at the level of the individual.

This way of framing the debate just seems daft to me. Individuals care for others. In particular, they care for their kin. We have known the details of why individuals care for kin since the 1960s. It should not be group selection vs individual selection - it should be group selection vs kin selection - and kin selection basically won this battle back in the 1980s. That is not to say that group selection is wrong, it's just not a favoured set of models and terminology.

EDIT2: David S. Wilson comments on Coyne's post.

FWIW, that's about a different post by Coyne, from some time back.