Definition: Read the given text and if it has abusive content then indicate via "yes". Otherwise indicate via"no". 
We consider the content to be abusive if it contains any of the following instances: (1) Identity Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which contains a negative statement made against an identity. An identity is a social category that relates to a fundamental aspect of individuals community, socio-demographics, position or self-representation) (2) Affiliation Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which express negativity against an affiliation. We define affiliation as a (more or less) voluntary association with a collective. Affiliations include but are not limited to: memberships (e.g. Trade unions), party memberships (e.g. Republicans), political affiliations (e.g. Right-wing people) and occupations (e.g. Doctors).) (3) Person Directed Abuse (e.g., Content which directs negativity against an identifiable person, who is either part of the conversation thread or is named. Person-directed abuse includes serious character based attacks, such as accusing the person of lying, as well as aggression, insults and menacing language.) and (4) Counter Speech (e.g., Content which challenges, condemns or calls out the abusive language of others.). Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].
Input: Secularism in its original form means separation of religion and state. It basically means that the state should not interfere in religious matter and religion should not interfere in state matters.   All religions should respect the laws no matter what. For example if using loudspeakers is considered a public offence, then you should be prosecuted for it, even if its just following your religious beliefs.     Things like separate marriage code for muslims, hajj subsidy by the government, as well as hinduphobia and embracing and catering muslims because they're a "minority under threat" by the leftist "liberals" and other bullshit spoon-feeding done to muslims is in itself against the very concept of secularism that these  stupid "progressive liberals" claim to be standing for.

yes