Angry over diversity in children's show, NRA TV depicts 'Thomas & Friends' in KKK hoods

[forgotmylogin]

18. This argument is called "reductio ad absurdum"

Where a point is fallaciously argued to illogical extremes. Example: opponents of gay marriage saying "what's next, I'm allowed to marry my dog?"

In this case, opponents are redefining diversity as "not drawing a line" instead of its actual goal, which is adjusting the lines to include reasonable situations.

Their tactic is to provide a false slippery-slope argument: "My god, you're putting macaroni noodles in the soup? What's next? Thumbtacks? Rocks? Condoms?" To which the answer is "No, of course not, that would be absurd," but they've falsely defined what you're trying to do as something absurd which can score points to people who don't understand logical fallacy.