When someone assert some statement in a debate, I often try to test the validity of the statement by using examples that apply to that statement. For instance, in some polemic theme, someone asserted "If something gets that kind of rejection, it's because it is good and important". I don't agree with that statement so I responded back "Other things that cause even more rejection than X are pedophile, violations, murder... Are you saying pedophile is good and important?". But then he replies back "How can you compare pedophile with X?". Of course, I'm not trying to compare pedophile with X, I'm just trying to figure out the validity of their own statement, and pedophile or murder just would demonstrate that the statement is false, nothing else.
My main problem is that this is not an isolated issue, I face this kind of responses too often, people assert something, I try to demonstrate if the statement is false by using (often radical because they are usually more obvious) examples that apply to the statement, and then they just try to avoid debate by saying that they are not comparable, often trying to make it as a silly comparison. I think my way of proving is perfectly right, but I'd like to make it clear to my opponent, by using examples I don't want to make a comparison, just to test the statement. How could I keep using this kind of demostrations without giving the impression I'm trying to establish a comparison?