If we can debate such "soft sciences" as psychotherapy, and such ideas as "fuzzy logic" I don't see a problem with ID being DEBATED. Where's the harm in discussion?
What rules of debate will you use? Science, or apologetics. And where will you conduct the debate?
Unless you can agree on a set of rules for the debate you will have nothing more than these FR threads.
The real debate in science is conducted in scientific journals and at scientific conferences, using the scientific method. Because it is based entirely on religion, ID has no part in that debate.
And, after all, Isacc Newton believed in a form of design, as necessary to any explanation of the motions of the planets. That turned out not to be the case, but design in some form, is the basis of any realistic philosophy. The scientif method has almost never proceeded along the loutlines proposed by Francis Bacon. Virtually every major discovery has resulted from a special insight rather than plodding through the available data.