I'm not going to go into a whole vocabulary lesson here, but the the definition of an "analogy" hinges on the fact that the two things being compared are similar in some respects, though dissimilar in others.
A comparison says "this is like that".
An analogy says "this aspect of this is like this aspect of that".
Need me to dumb it down more, or is that good enough?
Teague, you're talking nonsense.
Honestly, don't make it so easy on us. If you really don't know the definition of a word or its proper use, just admit it and move on, man. Admit and move on - not "just-make-something-up-that-sounds-good-at-the-moment-which-I-hope-most-believe"
Here are the respective definitions for each of the two words which seem to be causing you some difficulty, and that which BPV originally referenced:
Analogy
an inference that if things agree in some respects they probably agree in others
drawing a comparison in order to show a similarity in some respect; "the operation of a computer presents and interesting analogy to the working of the brain"; "the models show by analogy how matter is built up"
As you can see, the definition does not contain any necessary dissimiliarities in those items being compared, as you've claimed.
Comparison
the act of examining resemblances; "they made a comparison of noise levels"; "the fractions selected for comparison must require pupils to ...
relation based on similarities and differences
Maybe you should compare the soundness of an argument predicated on improper word usage?
As an analogy, your understanding of the basic definitions and uses of common terms is akin to Nick Saban's truthfulness, poor and lacking.