In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

Comment: Its funny watching the left twist themselves into knots defending religious views that literally oppress women.

This is why the left cannot be taken seriously on almost any matter. The same hypocrites who ranted and raved about Donald Trump were silent about Harvey Weinstein. They have marches and wear ribbons and talk about women’s rights and then say we have no right to step in when a religion oppresses women on what they can wear or do. 

Meanwhile if a Christian says women shouldn’t be allowed to have an abortion they go ape**** protest and riot saying and I quote “no one should be able to tell a woman what to do with her body”. How the F is this any different?

The selective and hypocritical morality of the left should be ignored as it is nonsensical and illogical. The ban should stand, otherwise what the law is saying is all religions are equal, except for islam which will get an exception every time. Thus the beginning of sharia law.
Non-sexual-explicit

Comment: Wow!  Never fails any issue that touches on sex brings out the masses.
In a sense, should as sex is the center of life.
The RCC persists that "every sperm is sacred." 
Hence, because gay people will not deposit it in the proper receptacle they will always be lepers in the RCC.
That's why masturbation remains a mortal sin in the RCC.
Who can calculate the number of mortal sins committed daily?
Beyond Einstein!
But some here would say god is counting!
Sexual-explicit

Comment: There is zero proof of collusion and obstruction. All we have is the lying leftist media's "unnamed sources", and the willing leftist consumers of lies to perpetuate the false accusations. 

You have no facts.

Non-sexual-explicit