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.

[EX Q]: Comment: Also depends on the butt, some of them are actually pretty nice.
[EX A]: Non-threat

[EX Q]: 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.
[EX A]: Non-threat

[EX Q]: Comment: actually, the evidence shows that its not the protests that are responsible -- its the situation that lead to the protests.    Why else would black enrollment drop 42% -- twice the rate of the drop in white enrollment?    Students did not want to be associated with a school that was so profoundly racist....

Now, you can make the argument that the protesters were to blame for bringing national attention to the racism and hate that pervaded Mizzou...but that would just affirm the suspicion that you're merely an apologists for bigotry.
[EX A]:
Non-threat