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: No, but when he called the Pharisees white sceplechurs doing things for show, he certainly was. You are taking their side. I am not endorsing sin, but I am saying it is not a device for social control that the reactionaries want it to be. By the way, the shame culture mostly going away in the Church is why so many stopped going to Mass. They no longer felt compelled by a necessitary to have a belief in the belief in God. Put another way, if you had a young person in your life who really did not believe in God, would you insist they go to Communion or even Mass (especially if they would do Communion if they attended)? The answer is they can stop going because they are Apostate and then, and pretty much only then, would their receiving be a sacralidge. Had they masturbated? Not so much.
answer:
Sexual-explicit


question:
Comment: The way the state runs, these ridiculous laws always cost more to enforce then they ever bring in.  There are already fines in place for littering and money isn't motivating the state to enforce those more vigorously.
answer:
Non-sexual-explicit


question:
Comment: Ex boyfriends and ex girlfriends are often not happy with the other side, but that does not give any man or woman the right to lay hands on them. If a person does not want to have a video shown of them having sex, dont make a sex tape. If the tape was made without your knowledge then the law will take care of that. No matter what anyone can say to you, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO ABUSE THEM.
pretty simple.
Is he going to jail? no. they are fighting for his right to play football, because she said something and he got mad, so its not his fault. Ridiculous.
answer:

Sexual-explicit