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: That is 100 % an impossibility. If you are pro life and vote and support candidates and a party that advocates full term and late term abortion at will then you cannot under any circumstance be pro life.

You have to look at where the candidates stand. Hillary wants us to be required to provide and pay for abortions and abortive medicines. She stated flat out in the debate she supports full term partial birth murder. HOW can ANY Catholic support her. Then there are the e - mails where she, through her campaign, states how "backwards" we are and advocates groups to sping to action when they can incite a "Catholic Spring." SHE will use law and the courts to mandate the marrying of homosexuals and the providing of abortion procedures. No Catholic can vote for her.
[A]: Non-sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: Sluts come in both male and female.  

When two sluts fornicate without simple, cheap, readily available contraception (supposedly from Planned Parenthood) unwanted children are often the result.

Dilatation and curettage.

Stir.  Repeat.  

Stir. Repeat.
[A]: Sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: There are a host of other changes this government should be looking at reversing, starting with some of the ridiculous guidelines for petty drug offences and the mandatory minimums those carry along with the stupid changes made to the pardon system making a person wait up to a decade before they can put their past behind them and once again become productive in society.

Who really cares about anal sex?  Great sense of priorities these clowns have whenever practically no one has been prosecuted for this for over 30 years.
[A]:
Sexual-explicit