Some Parameters of a One-State Palestinian-Israeli Nation

I have always used this space to focus much more on theology, but here is an issue where the rubber meets the road.
In an NPR article, Ahmad Aweidah, a Palestinian man who heads the Palestinian Exchange, a stock market, has joined right-wing Israelis in stating that the two-state solution is unworkable. Unlike the conservative Israelis, he advocates for a single-state, a "rainbow state. A state for all of its citizens. A new South Africa."
This is something I have been advocating for years. Of course, there is no reason to listen to me, a nobody third-generation Palestinian American and a Christian to boot. Still, just in case the apparent lostness in the article, as to what such a state would look like, is real, here are my ideas on how this state should look:

The first big hairy question was what to name it. I have two possibilities. My favorite is The Children of Abraham. That best sums up the situation, I think, but the alternative is The Land of Abraham. I thought about the Land of Promise, but probably that would be too contentious. So let's stick with children, shall we? Nations are made of the dust of the earth, but also the people that inhabit it, and it is on the people that we must focus if we are to be successful.
Now in keeping with that idea, I propose to constitute a strong but limited government, one whose legal framework allows both Jews and Muslims to practice their religions. Not sure how to express that in a legal document, but the idea is to explicitly state freedom of religion so that, for example, Jewish people can close their shops on the Sabbath and Muslim people can ignore this practice without any recrimination. It may be that the language goes further and allows any religious practice, so long as it does not hurt people, but it might be smart to specifically focus on Judaism and Islam.
A thought along these lines is to call for everyone to declare his or her religious affiliation, and thus be bound voluntarily by an applicable subset of religious laws and special courts that adjudicate them. I don't know if that would help or hurt, as even within Judaism and Islam there are significant differences in practice and doctrine, and one must have the freedom to change affiliations, including choosing no affiliation. The proliferation of special religious affiliations could become unmanageable. Perhaps these religious courts and other organizations must remain outside of the government and have no power to compel compliance. If one has no affiliation, then one would not be able to bring a complaint under any religious subset of the law. The object is to recognize religious expression and provide a free choice, but not irresponsible license to do whatever you please. No society can provide that.
Beyond the legal framework, as part of that religious freedom, there must be a declaration of tolerance, so that anyone who is a citizen of this country is presumed to agree to tolerate religious practices that they actually disagree with. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. articulated the best concept for this issue when he said that we must learn to live together as brothers, or perish together as fools. I'm not saying it's easy: I'm saying it is necessary. Neither persons nor institutions can be allowed to oppress people for their religious practices.
Next, there must be equality of property rights and the right to travel within the country. Anyone must be able to live anywhere and be secure in their houses and persons, as the sixth amendment of the U.S. Constitution states. Property rights have been a big issue in this place for a long time, and a special temporary court should be set up to sort out the vast numbers of conflicts. This "temporary" court could take a hundred years to resolve all the issues, but it's better than not resolving them at all.

There, that didn't take long - the rest is standard democratic government stuff. I'm sure there's an app for that :-)