Categorize the comment on the basis of insult. If the comment is insulting output Yes, otherwise output No.

[EX Q]: I was actually a little confused by my verse, "while the weak person eats only vegetables." It sounded more like an anti-vegetarian view, but I assume it has something to do with the arbitrary rules of different sects.
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: I agree with using PF earnings to fund some government. I couldn't tell but it seemed the author was in favor of the status quo. He also seemed to advocate spending cuts(which I support but likely won't happen), and an income tax. 

Problem is, that ain't gonna do it. It would be a miracle if there were $500 million in spending cuts. Or perhaps a $500 million whack in oil taxes and credits. A combination of Income tax and sales tax might be good for 300 or 400 million dollars. You still have to find 2.5 billion somewhere...or hope like heck for $120 pb oil.

That's why I made the stupid post on purpose. I wanted to show how much income tax that wage and income earners would have to pay in a hypothetical to eliminate the deficit as it stands now. Because the 6% of federal liability would only cover around 2.5% of it, or around $100 million

Failed reading comprehension? I'll admit it was a weak subject for me. But something needs to change in the status quo with the PF and PFD.
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: I am concerned for the safety of the transgendered person.    YOu really think high school students haven't been exposed to nudity and violence already on TV?   The sight of a naked transvestite isn't likely  to damange these kids psyche.   

Please note, I'm trying to find an agreement that fits the safety of all.  I'm for a seperate space to bath and dress.
[EX A]:
No