In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: obscene and non-obscene. A comment is obscene if it is considered offensive to the public sense of decency, for example because it too obviously relates to sex or contains language regarded as taboo in polite usage.

Q: Comment: It's too bad that Mr. Trump doesn't have the same international courage on climate change as he does criticizing a foreign mayor from his phone...on the golf course..
And it's too bad that Peyton Manning hangs out with a groper and racist demagogue...

A: Non-obscene
****
Q: Comment: The authors of the JJ report insist that homosexuality played no role in the abuse crisis, but their own data undermine this conclusion. For example, they plainly admit that "81% of the victims [between 1950 and 2002] were male," and that 78% were post-pubescent.

So if the abusers weren't pedophiles, and the victims were mostly adolescent males, wouldn't that make the victimizers homosexuals?

What else could we possibly be talking about if not homosexuality?

Why can't you answer this question?

A: Non-obscene
****
Q: Comment: I am legitimately torn here--on one hand, I'm glad to see an operating budget pass the House. There are only a couple weeks left, after all.

On the other hand, this is a pretty shady way of doing it. No, it's not Mugabe-esque, or Pearl Harbor-esque, and such comments are lunacy, but it is pretty sleazy. I am disappointed in the House leadership for this tactic.

Come on, Legislature. Get your collective shit together. Work out a budget and avoid a shutdown. You wasted another year not solving the fiscal crisis, but the immediate problem now is keeping the doors open and lights on.

A:
Obscene
****