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.

[EX Q]: Comment: Which part of "I'm a priest, and you are not" do you have difficulty understanding, Pandora?

Once again, you leap to the defense of a priest who is being a jerk.
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: Your name fits you.....DICK!
[EX A]: Sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: Due process was provided when they were considered disabled and eligible for SSI.  It was further provided when they were adjudged to require a cxonservator.  If you wish to address "due Process", let's do look at "felons."  Do you think it's reasonable to apply the standard to exclude a person convicted of tax evasion from purchasing or owning a firearm as applied to someone convicted of armed robbery or attempted murder?  The ineligibility for firearm ownership was determined by "status" and, in the case of felons, that's a very broad status.  Felons can "recover' their Second Amendment Rights, but it requires legal action on their part to do so. 

 Frankly, I would suggest those severely mentally-ill individuals who were excluded by the Obama Order were more of a danger than most felons.
[EX A]:
Non-sexual-explicit