This simile is outrageous

like, as, so, than; or through the use of a verb such as: resembles. Although similes and metaphors are generally seen as interchangeable, similes acknowledge the imperfections and limitations of the comparative relationship to a greater extent than metaphors. Generally, metaphor is the stronger and more encompassing of the two forms of rhetorical analogies.A simile […]

like, as, so, than; or through the use of a verb such as: resembles. Although similes and metaphors are generally seen as interchangeable, similes acknowledge the imperfections and limitations of the comparative relationship to a greater extent than metaphors. Generally, metaphor is the stronger and more encompassing of the two forms of rhetorical analogies.
A simile could be made to explicitly provide the basis of a comparison or leave this basis implicit. In the implicit case, the simile leaves the audience to determine for themselves which features of the target are being predicated. Simile is implicit in these few sentences: ‘He is like a lion’; ‘She is like a rose’; and ‘Her eyes are like stars’. The use of ‘as’, however, makes similes more explicit as could be seen in the following sentences: ‘He is as fast as lightening’; ‘She walks as gracefully as a cat’; ‘He was as hungry as a lion’; and ‘He was as busy as a bee’.
In Arabic Rhetoric, a sentence that expresses simile should ordinarily comprise of four components namely: (1) The subject of comparison (called Al-Mushabah in Arabic); (2) The object with which the subject is compared (called Al-Mushabah Bihi); (3) The connective word/particle (called Adaatu Tashbih in Arabic); and (4) The basis of comparison in which the subject and the object both share some resemblance (called Wajhu Shabah in Arabic). These four elements could be seen in the sentence: ‘Aisha’s eyes twinkled like stars’. While ‘Aisha’ is the subject, the word ‘stars’ is the object with which Aisha is compared; whereas ‘like’ is the connective word, and the act of ‘twinkling’ as the basis of comparison.
One basic principle that underscores the use of similes in rhetoric generally is that the author/speaker must not be seen to be outrageous or unfair in comparing two things; noting that the two items must have some characteristic features that are naturally and noticeably common to both. It gives no rational meaning, for instance, comparing water with fire; or God with pen. But it makes sense to; for example, compare man with lion because man could under certain circumstances behave like a lion in terms of brevity when fighting or anger when hungry.
I feel obliged to take readers through this lengthy tutorial on this aspect of language stylistics because I have the dual responsibility, as a Muslim and as a student of linguistics, to raise a ‘point of order’ when errors especially those with misleading consequences are made, consciously or unconsciously, by some of us. I remain indicted if I fail to draw attention to any such speech or action that is injurious either to the image of Islam and Muslims or inconsistent with the well-known theoretical rules and culture of a given language.
The Daily Trust of Wednesday April 16, 2014 quoted the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Alhaji Adamu Muazu on page 8 as saying, ‘Yes, joining PDP is like joining Islam because if you convert today you are like any other Muslim. So also in the PDP if you join us today you are like any other member. So Shekarau is like any old member’. Alhaji Adamu Muazu made this simile at a rally in Kano on April 15, 2014 when Sardaunan-Kano was received in to the PDP.
Given the fact that the ‘basis of comparison’ constitutes an essential component of every blameless simile, there are at least three arguments to explain why a political party (not just PDP) cannot be compared with Islam. One, it is conventionally considered an anti-party activity for a registered member of a political party to have any effective political link with members of other parties. But in Islam, Muslims are permitted to marry Christians who (as followers of another religion, Christianity) are practically non-Muslims in faith and in worship.
Two, if a Muslim steals or commits a crime punishable by law, appropriate Islamic ruling is applied regardless of the status or rank of the person involved. There are no sacred cows in Islam. In PDP however, allegations of corrupt practices made against members of the party are either ignored or swept under the carpet. Members convicted over criminal charges are sometimes pardoned too. Even a hired defense counsel couldn’t have strained himself in the manner President Goodluck Jonathan did during his last media chat on the NTA. Jonathan dismissed the alleged case of unremitted $20 billion oil revenue involving the Minister of Petroleum Resources Diezani Alison Maduaeke; to protect the latter from prosecution. The pardon granted former Bayelsa state governor Alamieyeseigha who was convicted over fraud allegations is another case of PDP using the instrument of presidential powers to protect its criminal members.
Three, Islam is a religion with a statutory obligation of worshipping Allah (SWT)  through the five daily prayers, paying zakat, observing Ramadan fast, and going on hajj (for those who have the means). Joining Islam requires expressing a creed statement while joining PDP does not because it is not a religion except if Nigerian politicians decides to make it one.
If Adamu Muazu felt APC or other political parties in Nigeria were not good enough, he should have been clever to mention, in place of Islam, political parties in other parts of the world which may not only compare favourably with PDP but are also bigger and older. Why not compare PDP with the Conservative or Labour Party in the United Kingdom? Or with the Socialist Party in France? Or with the Democratic and the Republican parties in the United States of America? Or with the ANC in South Africa? Or with the CPP in Ghana?
It would have also sounded normal if Muazu had compared PDP with powerful labour unions in the country including the NLC; TUC; NMA; NBA; ASUU; SSANU; NASU; ASUP; PENGASSAN; NUPENG; or even with any of the over two thousand pro-Jonathan groups.
Even if Adamu Muazu were in any way under instructions at that rally to pronounce a simile with religious connotations, he should have been wise enough to compare PDP with Jama’tu Nasril Islam (JNI), the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs in Nigeria (SCIAN), or the Muslim Students Society of Nigeria (MSSN); and not Islam as a religion. If foreign Muslim organizations were preferred, he could have expediently compared PDP with the Fatah and Hamas of Palestine, or with the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.
Muazu sounded outrageous in the simile under reference. His style of simile belittles Islam. But then, even if Islam were to be misunderstood, and out of ignorance, taken for granted; is it PDP out of all the political parties in and outside Nigeria that would be compared with Islam? Wal Iyadhu Billah!
Let us not allow the euphoric orgy of power or other ephemeral comforts and privileges of life such as wealth, women, children, authority, intelligence, physical strength, etc, delude us in to stating contemptible similes that we may lack adequate explanations to offer when asked by God. May Allah (SWT) guide us against becoming puppets to Shaytan, in our speeches and actions, amin.