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.

Example Input: Comment: Trid sees nothing wrong with "No Dogs or Jews", "We don't serve Muslims" and so on. He supports bigotry. And no, that is NOT a straw man, but the clear and obvious implication of your " If either the buyer or the seller does not want to enter into that contract for whatever reason then I believe they have the right to refuse." Thank you for proving that your claim to being a Christian is a complete sham.
Example Output: Non-sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: It's the Republican ethos--"just grab 'em by the pussy"--and the rich get what they want at the expense of everything and everyone else.
Example Output: Sexual-explicit

Example Input: Comment: Some of the first actions of the Liberal government was to kill the union transparency laws and to give the Teachers a tax break. What better way to demonstrate that the Ontario liberals were taking their union\immigrant powerbase national. It's amazing how mutually beneficial the Liberals' policies are to those two groups; immigration increases job security for the public sector. While the private sector faces downward pressure on wages from increased competition  the public sector is insulated and actually benefits from the lower prices.  

How could the Liberals kill the union transparency bill and force the First Nations to publicly expose their spending? They Couldn't. So, totally ignoring their promise of openness and transparency the Liberals were forced to also kill the First Nations' transparency laws. As in Ontario, it would appear that the Liberals' desire for power outweigh their desire for fair governance or integrity.
Example Output:
Non-sexual-explicit