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.

Ex Input:
Comment: Hardly, we should be proud we have the "balls" to respect dissent as a time-honored American value!

Ex Output:
Obscene

Ex Input:
Comment: And, finally:
.
"We'd be in uncharted territory, that is unarguable."
.
What nonsense.
.
The vast majority of democracies world-wide use PR. Are you really suggesting Canadians are too dumb to figure it out?
.
Or are you merely suggesting that it only works in countries where the populations once worshipped Odin, Thor, and Freya?
.
Bring on Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and the Wagnerian opera ...

Ex Output:
Non-obscene

Ex Input:
Comment: "North Korea lacks capacity to hit U.S. with accuracy"

Yeah OK, but what about North Korea's desire to hit the US?

None of the fear mongers ever, including their stenographers in the press, put forth a rational argument that North Korea has the DESIRE to strike the US FIRST, or any other country for that matter.

Given how this matter is constantly framed by the press, are we to blindly believe that Kim Jong-un has a death? Please explain Idrees Ali, G&M and et al.

Ex Output:
Non-obscene