In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: identity-attack and non-identity-attack. Identity attack refers to anything rude or disrespectful about someone's identity, including appearance, race, gender, and sexual orientation.

[Q]: Comment: We have the most worthless Congress ever...the party that now finds itself in power had no idea they were going to win and no plan of what to do had they won. The establishment preordained this year to be a "battle" between Low Energy Jeb and Crooked Hillary with the latter taking the throne. The Republicans were expecting to be the opposition which is apparently all they're good at save Rand Paul and few others...totally worthless. Trump could make a deal with anyone until he met McConnell, Ryan, and McCann. The states who reelect these career hucksters deserve all of the ruin Obamacare brings them.
[A]: Non-identity-attack


[Q]: Comment: Oh, “BIGOTRY!”
Homosexual acts are sinful, and, according to Sacred Scripture, one of the four sins “crying to heaven for vengeance.”  A gay marriage is (un)naturally going to involve said acts.  Are you capable of comprehending this?  The baker doesn’t want to participate in a wedding that promotes this sin.  Now, a bigot is “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; [you certainly fit that description to a tee] especially :one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.”
The question boils down to obstinacy and intolerance.  Well, when bases his opinion or belief of something as crystal clear as”homosexual behavior is sinful”, is it obstinacy or principled dissent?  And why do you think we should be tolerant of sin?  That certainly isn’t Christ-like, being as that Christ admonished everyone to “sin no more.”  You are the obstinate bigot here, clearly.
[A]: Identity-attack


[Q]: Comment: "Except in the narrowest circumstances, no one should be forced to choose between living out his or her faith and complying with the law," Sessions wrote. 

So, if my religion tells me to beat my wife, drive drunk and discriminate against gay people, I should be allowed to do that regardless of the law?
[A]:
Identity-attack