In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: insult and non-insult. Insult is any lanugage or act that is disrespectful or scornfully abusive.

Comment: Nenshi is Calgary's village idiot.  Anti business. Anti Calgary Flames. And he panders to Muslims. He's gotta go.
Insult

Comment: I would suggest that paragraph four has been competely screwed up by the G&M as it contradicts paragraph one. President Trump, in  the eyes of the G&M is quite stupid, but he is not as stupid as whomever proof read this article.
Insult

Comment: I have no idea what Meghan Clark is talking about. It sounds like theo-babble to me. Can someone please translate?

Sarasi1 already said it beautifully, but I think the church has many things right on matters of sexuality. Sex  is fraught and ripe for exploitation and should be approached scrupulously. I also agree with Sarasi1 that sexual essentialism and "natural law" arguments against LGBTs are bunk. It's a conundrum for the church to unwind its views on homosexuality from its teleological perspective on sexuality.

Non-insult