- This fallacy is committed when, while arguing a general rule, a comparison is made between a single aspect of two situations, and a reply treats it as a claim the two are directly analogous to each other. For example
"I do not support the use of cracks to bypass copy protection, regardless of my opposition to copy protection. I believe it is always wrong to oppose the law by breaking it."
"Such a position is odious: it implies that you would not have supported Martin Luther King."
"Are you saying that software piracy is as important as the struggle for Black liberation? How dare you!"