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.

Q: Comment: This topic must be expanded beyond "clergy sex abuse" to abuse of all kinds by clergy. There are priests who engage in patterns of verbal and emotional abuse which are just as damaging to the victims, and if the victims report the treatment, they are ridiculed, intimidated and manipulated to keep silent by those in authority over these abusers, who go merrily on their way, thinking, "As long as I'm not caught in bed with a woman, or a man, or looking at porn on a computer, nothing will happen." They behave like spoiled children, and those in authority enable and protect them.

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: While I agree with the basics of your thought (the Legislature failed us), to think the chief thief would not have vetoed the PFD is foolishness. That man wants our PFD, and nothing will stop him. The Legislature could have hacked the budget with a light saber, and Walker would have still capped our PFD.

A: Non-sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: I'm afraid google is not your friend on this one.  Cover your arse, as they say.

A:
Sexual-explicit
****