Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.
--------
Question: All of your so-called repub's good job is a result of sequestration.

Answer: No


Question: Of course birth control should be private, but your logic does not apply.  You may notice the word 'teens' in my post.  Teens are often uneducated in even how they can get pregnant (some parents are afraid of sex education), and few plan far enough ahead to prepare for sex.  They share a lot of half-true gossip among their own society, very little is private, and superstition is common.   
I worked with teens for 20 years. The fact you question my education and intellectual ability only shows your ignorance or stubbornness.  Yes, religious sentiment does still run deep, and that is part of the reason for lack of adequate sex education in school.

Answer: Yes


Question: I am personally awed by the power of religion to do good, and bad, to those that believe. But the question isn't really about respecting the tenets of a religion so much as questioning how far can those tenets be pushed on the non-religious that are, by circumstance, under the control of the religious. I'm all for the freedom of religion. I don't care about the particular tenet of this case, just the collision of religion and secular.   

I also acknowledge my view of the situation is as a common citizen, not a Supreme Court judge. So my comments should be taken that way.  On a commoner level, does it seem fine to you that a religious organization should try to prevent the government from telling a health insurer that it should provide reimbursement for contraception? It seems even more removed than a religious baker being forced to bake a cake for a gay couple. The Poor Sisters never see the contraceptives and don't see the transfer of money.

Answer:
Yes