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.

[EX Q]: Comment: It's equally ludicrous my friend.  I intended say there is more than one behavior that causes addiction and prescription drugs are every bit as likely to destroy families.   The city wants to chose their 'bad' behavior to tax.  It's not a fair tax it's a sin tax.  I ask again why chose marijuana users?
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: So women, a protected class, are less worthy of a college education preference than those who are non-white.  

I wonder how the gays, lesbians, transgendered and other 'protected' classes will fit into the paradigm which says racial preferences are the most important. 

Will there be a sliding scale?
[EX A]: Non-sexual-explicit

[EX Q]: Comment: This op-ed letter sounds like Sean Hahn got into my stash, and got a little too high. Actually, smoking 1-3 cigarettes a day is healthy for you. It's smoking 1-3 packs a day that will cause health problems. Pertaining to Sean's laughable claim cancer and the like will go off the charts 20-30 years from now, we already have millions of heavy pot smokers for over 50 years, and his claim has not remotely come to fruition. As for being unhealthy for you...before I smoked pot my knees swelled so badly I couldn't walk. Pot gave me back somewhat of a normal life, and empowered me to get back to work. But why let facts get in the way of ignorance.
[EX A]:
Non-sexual-explicit