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.

Comment: I have long maintained that racism and bigotry is a mental illness and should be included as such in DSM lV, the bible of mental health practitioners. Left untreated it produces psychotic and dangerous people like Dylan Roof, white, who said at his sentencing hearing today he feels no remorse and isn’t sorry for killing 9 innocent Black people in a Charleston S.C. church. He pumped 77 bullets into them as they bowed their heads and closed their eyes to pray. That is racism.
Non-obscene

Comment: I guess you'd call me a liberal because I tend to favor governmental intervention when "private" behaviors pose serious risks to others.  In this case, however, I swing to the Right.  Assuming that Mr. Jarlstrom's primary "transgression" was to write that he knew something about "engineering" (a generic term), the Board's crusade against him is inane., to say the least.  That would be like me (a retired political scientist) being fined for  illegally "practicing law" because I teach a course in mediation as an effective legal tool.  The case against Mr. Jarlstrom appears to be utter nonsense.  Perhaps one should attack Board members for their lack of proper qualifications.
Non-obscene

Comment: Damn shame the bear was killed.  Are there no provisions for tranquilizing the bear and re-locating it?

Obscene