In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

[Q]: Comment: Obama traded 5 high level terrorists for this traitor.
[A]: Non-sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: Rules about sex, formulated by the celibate, based on dubious interpretations of scripture (which says NOTHING about oral sex, for example) and grounded in the silly opinion that sexual activity has to be "justified" by saying it must be for procreation (a view that owes more to the Gnostics, the Neoplatonists and the Roman Stoics than scripture) are less than compelling.
[A]: Sexual-explicit


[Q]: Comment: totally agree.  I remember the 60's seeing Roman Catholic priests locked arm in arm with MLK and other faith groups.  Didn't see one on the news clips I saw but saw plenty of our Protestant sisters and brothers walking bravely into the breech.  oh,  I did see Cardinal Wuerl in the Rose Garden standing behind the man called The President as he signed an executive order for the Little Sisters of the Poor.
these bishops have danced with the devil indeed.
[A]:
Non-sexual-explicit


