Since the subject in hand has been discussed among the staff of the website before, I'm certain they would not mind listing the rest of the reasons they decided against the idea. Simply providing a "NO" as an answer is hardly satisfying. We are speaking of a debate subforum after all, in which extensive arguments are meant to be the main focus in projecting a viewpoint and convincing other people.
It is not a matter of "shoving it down one's throat", as it constitutes an expansion on the already existing subforums and not one that everyone must follow. One is not obligated to monitor it closely, and as Kuro said, the moderation of such threads could be done by their creator or a local mod.
If the main problem would be low 'traffic' then we could propose an experimental subforum, similar to the (now dead) Sports one. The steps are simple: Create the subforum with a specific set of rules (possibly more lax than usual, since heated arguments are bound to happen), check its activity at regular intervals, and decide to let it continue or terminate it.
Currently the number of people who actively debate on the site is small, yet this should not be a demotivation. Most people, probably due to their young age, are unsure of themselves or uncomfortable with voicing their opinions or struggle projecting them in a way that's not tiring for other readers. As of now, the debates are usually political, but that needs not be the norm, as multiple everyday subjects with varying degrees of importance can be discussed. That of course serves as an expansion to the original debate subjects, so if the decision is made and the subforum gets created, it's up to those who make the rules/guidelines what subjects fall under the subforum as pure debate.
That said, it's positive for the site to have this serve as a reminder for some of the basics about debating. Unfortunately having a logical fallacy in one's argument is usually unavoidable, but the rule of 'empathy' can explain where the person making the fallacy is coming from. So even if the argument itself is weak, the mere use of the fallacy helps understand the debater's mind, so we shouldn't be that strict when we spot it (heck due to not always finding the proper words I end up creating fallacies). I believe this is the apropriate place to also discuss about the rules such a subforum would have and how different they would be compared to the others, based on the nature of the subforum.