I have not yet read a comprehensive description of what ID proponents are claiming. If this lack is the result of the idea that there is no supernatural force in the first place, it is partly understandable, but it does not identify all the parts of the argument.
Intelligent Design posits that living things are complex. This is fact not just incredulity. Irreducible Complexity is the concept that any living thing, if changed only slightly, would not work properly or at all. Take out a component of a cell and it will not function, remove an organ from a person and serious problems will be the result unless care is taken and/or outside means are provided to make up for it.
If at this point in your reading, you are becoming emotional, why?
Further, the origin of the universe is unknown. The information required to build the first cell did not exist. If a liquid was somehow enclosed in an envelope, it would still lack the internal machinery to convert some outside energy source to sustain itself. It would not be alive. It would not contain the information or machinery to divide itself. The idea of a self-creating cell is nonsensical since no genetic information was in existence.
Evolution is still described as a robust theory. The arguments between it and Creation and Intelligent Design are old and have been repackaged. Somehow, great scientific discoveries have been made by religious people, this in contradiction to the idea that a belief in a supreme being has clouded their ability to function or interact with scientific subjects, and contribute to society in a reasonable, productive manner.
I am against forcing people to believe things. Wishing away the existence of religious people is nonsensical.