Categorize the comment on the basis of sexual explicitness. If the comment is sexually explicit output Yes, otherwise output No.

[EX Q]: This is just another of Nathan's veiled defenses of homophobia. My gay friends can't be holy unless they go straight or celibate. This isn't a "challenge" this is prejudice pure and simple.

Imago Dei = Westboro Church without the colorful signs.

Having said that, let's all have a moment of silence for Jules Bailey's political career. May it rest in peace. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, defeat on election day.
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Nice. :) Although it's a shame the resolution on the files make some of the lettering tough to read. I'm not sure what the last word in the lower right strip is. I like the design of the 2000s guy in the third strip. That's a guy who grew up watching Kevin Smith movies.
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: this is pure balderdash drivel. The same folks who drove stoned before legalization are the same folks driving stoned after legalization. They have not doubled in accidents as AAA is pulling numbers from their buttocks insulting intelligence.
[EX A]:
Yes