@Jamal: Please note that this is an expression of my subjective feelings regarding the pseudo-scientific sophistry of Intelligent Design. It is not a prescriptive arguing i.e. not censorship material, and it explicitly asks the community for alternative opinions.
I actually have a degree of respect for the humility manifested by candid, traditional believers. They openly give up on Reason to surrender their minds to transcendence, to the idea of something larger than the human mind. I can even accept that there is a certain rationality in that submission.
But this humility is completely out of reach for me. As a metaphysician, a figure like the local Messiah simply does not impress me; Christ is just some creator of a Religion; he merely coded a human moral OS (Operating System) for an expanded tribal herd. If I could travel back in time, I would use pure Logos to shut his prophetic mouth and send him directly to India, completely bypassing the “Resurrection” (i.e., the failed crucifixion) square on the magical religious board game. 
It would have saved Humanity from the monotheistic disaster we currently live in.
Now, here is the fundamental problem with the “Intelligent Design” variant of belief: their supernaturalism does not express intimate humility. It expresses a hateful, resentful revenge against the rational superiority of Science (and, fundamentally, against the rationality of Philosophy, from which Science emerged as “Natural Philosophy”).
That is exactly why they continually ape pseudo-scientific arguments. There is absolutely nothing respectable here—only cowardly dissimulation and intellectual manipulation. Conceptually speaking, these arguments should be beaten to death on any philosophical forum that possesses even a shred of inner strength.
The problem, however, is that in our post-modern, “death-of-Thought” epoch, confronting them directly usually leads to an immediate ban. Why? Because these sub-Nietzschean Last Men can only respond by clicking the “Report” button—it is the absolute ceiling of their cognitive abilities.
So, what is your policy here? How would you deal with them?