In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: obscene and non-obscene. A comment is obscene if it is considered offensive to the public sense of decency, for example because it too obviously relates to sex or contains language regarded as taboo in polite usage.

Q: Comment: What's wrong with the whole UNITE the RIGHT nonsense? First, the Alberta PCs believe ABC, while the Wildrose believe AXY. There are some odd people who think that because both believe A, then union is possible. Others know that BC and XY are exclusionary terms. Either PCs or Wildrosers will be asked to give up some of their principles. And I doubt that's going to happen.

Kenney called for "severely normal" Albertans to unite. That's code for let's agree to be xenophobic, homophobic and misogynistic. Every progressive plank of the PC platform will be torn up and thrown out. And it will be hard to say how  many of the voters who voted PC in 2015 will remain when you learn that a leader of a Pro-Life group has bragged she got Kenney elected leader by selling hundreds of memberships.

Kenney hates public schools. He believes God rules this country, not government. He is a climate change denier. He hates youth culture and women's rights. He's a Christian fundamentalist hardliner. Oy!

A: Non-obscene
****
Q: Comment: ...whew, I thought Glenn Beck was just a simple nut, you however sound like King Cashew.

A: Non-obscene
****
Q: Comment: If the hate crime label is used to mete out longer prison sentences for racists who commit violent crimes for no other reason than a person's skin color or religion, then the only people who would seriously challenge it would be racists, or possibly someone who doesn't believe in harsh punishments for violent criminals.

A:
Non-obscene
****