instruction:
Categorize the comment on the basis of sexual explicitness. If the comment is sexually explicit output Yes, otherwise output No.
question:
Larry, so you understand the significance of the problem- the pending extinction of elephants and rhinos, but you want to make zero sacrifice to do anything about it?

Many poor Africans argue they need to kill elephants to make money- and none of these Africans are getting annual Permanent Fund Dividend checks, or the numerous other welfare benefits that are doled out in Alaska.

There have been many cases where walrus have been illegally slaughtered in Western Alaska- only to take tusks. A recent, vile case involved the killing of many walrus with semi- automatic weapons, and the only thing harvested were the tusks.

Where do you think the Chinese are going to turn when they can no longer illegally import elephant and rhino ivory due to loss of these animals?

And you do understand walrus are under significant threat due to the loss of sea ice?
answer:
No

question:
But under the law. a gay baker could not refuse service to someone on the basis of religion, national origin, race, color, or sex. The law should treat EVERYONE equally.
answer:
Yes

question:
Don't the people who pay some of the highest property taxes in the city deserve the protection from the fastest responding fire department in the country? Why do home owners have to defend themselves when all we hear about at assembly election time/bargaining time is how fast AFD responds and if you cut services we'll all perish?
answer:
No