That objection doesn't make sense. Order is either local or global. If evolution required global order to increase, that would be identical to saying that it required time to run backwards. Therefore, if evolution requires any kind of order to increase, it can only require local order to increase.
To speak concretely, the objection is to (e.g.) non-living matter organizing itself into living matter. That's a local increase in order, but is not ruled out by the 2nd Law because there is a net input of energy to the system; it's not closed.
Which is why the 2nd Law is still applicable unless proven that evolution only requires local order, and somehow increases general disorder in a system.
Everything that happens increases general disorder in a closed system. (If it doesn't, it doesn't happen. "Time passes" is another way of saying "the total disorder of the universe [or any other closed system] increases".)
The 2nd Law argument is a bad one, and shouldn't be used.
“If evolution required global order to increase, that would be identical to saying that it required time to run backwards.”
Which is why people are arguing that evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
It applies not only to the creation of living organisms but also to the increase in complexity observed in living organisms over time.
I happen to like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as an argument, because it’s easy enough to understand. It also raises the question, if evolutionary theory is in fact correct, how do they explain this?