instruction:
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.
question:
Comment: "Arson in the second degree 
164.315 
 A person commits the crime of arson in the second degree if:

By knowingly engaging in the manufacture of methamphetamine, the person causes fire or causes an explosion that damages ...Any property of another and the damages to the property exceed $750"

I think we need to add 'hash oil manufacturing' to this Oregon statute.   Too many stoned idiots are out there playing  chemist.
answer:
Non-sexual-explicit


question:
Comment: RadirD, Kim Jung Un and the DPRK regime threaten us all the time.  Why would Trump or any other rational person use that as a line in the sand?  It took them a few hours after his asinine statement to threaten us yet again.  Foolish.

The only person who yells out "I'm going to punch you in the face!" is a coward who doesn't actually want a fistfight (like Kim Jong Un).  A serious person would just slam you in the kisser without warning.

Don't get me wrong, the DPRK is a growing and serious threat and there may not be a way out of a conflict at this point.  They have been seriously mishandled and underestimated by every president (both GOP and Dems) since the Korean war.
answer:
Non-sexual-explicit


question:
Comment: I count any story about a priest that doesn't involve child sexual abuse as a positive story!
answer:

Sexual-explicit