instruction:
In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.
question:
Comment: No. I'm sorry.  We are allowed to call out the Ford family legacy as harmful and embarrassing AND still also be appalled by bureaucratic waste, left wingers and right alike.  That's yet another reason why I loathe the number Rob and his strategists pulled over on us, the ridiculous us vs them, suburban vs urban, elites vs working guy baloney.  Why do people eat that up?  (God bless -- and help -- America!!)
answer:
Non-threat


question:
Comment: Definitely NOT.  Besides your ignorantly equating Christianity and Islam as being equivalent or the same when they are not, one, people indulging in their private sexual predilections, that does nothing but give them cheap thrills, is not the same as religion,  particularly Christianity which is the foundation of civilization in Europe and the United States. Comparing what people do with their wing ding or other body crevices with Christianity is highly asinine.  Two, there is no civil right to engage in any sexual behavior you want to engage in, based on nothing but just because you feel like it.  Necrophilia, pedophilia and bestiality must be allowed also based on that.

But why the cherry picked hatred of Christianity and Islam?  Buddhism and Hinduism are ok, but Christianity and Islam are not?   Based on what do you make that distinction?  Is that based solely upon whether some let you do whatever you feel like doing and some don't?  That would be a myopic, self absorbed basis.
answer:
Non-threat


question:
Comment: A slap in the face to the rest of Canada  !
answer:

Threat