Gma vs ang dating daan
To merit a "G" rating, the program must be "suitable for all ages," which, in turn, means that the "material for television [does not], in the judgment of the [MTRCB], x x x contain anything unsuitable for children and minors, and may be viewed without adult guidance or supervision." As previously discussed by the Court, the vulgar language petitioner used on prime-time television can in no way be characterized as suitable for all ages, and is wholly inappropriate for children.
To be sure, petitioner has not contested the fact of his having made statements on the air that were contextually violative of the program's "G" rating.
In support of his urging, he cites Iglesia ni Cristo v. Petitioner's invocation of Iglesia ni Cristo to support his hands-off thesis is erroneous. The rule on this matter, as laid down by Pacifica in relation to Action for Children's Television, is crystal-clear.
Obviously, he fails to appreciate what the Court stated in that particular case when it rejected the argument that a religious program is beyond MTRCB's review and regulatory authority. I found three more words that had to be put on the list of words you could never say on television, and they were fart, turd and twat, those three. But should the majority still have any doubt in their minds, such doubt should be resolved in favor of free speech and against any interference by government.
And just to set things straight, the penalty imposed is on the program, not on petitioner. Like, ah, snatch, box and pussy all have other meanings, man. onwards, clearly within the safe harbor period as established in Action for Children's Television.
His claim, assuming its veracity, that some INC ministers distorted his statements respecting amounts Ang Dating Daan owed to a TV station does not convert the foul language used in retaliation as religious speech.The following information will serve as transparent evidence of scandals that have rocked Eli Soriano and his Ang Dating Daan cult.As normal for all religious cult leaders, Soriano has faced his share of scandals ranging from homosexual rape, tax evasion charges and lawsuits for hate speech and he is currently on the run over some of these charges. Petitioner seeks reconsideration on the following grounds or issues: (1) the suspension thus meted out to the program constitutes prior restraint; (2) the Court erred in ruling that his utterances did not constitute exercise of religion; (3) the Court erred in finding the language used as offensive and obscene; (4) the Court should have applied its policy of non-interference in cases of conflict between religious groups; and (5) the Court erred in penalizing the television program for the acts of petitioner. Petitioner's threshold posture that the suspension thus imposed constitutes prior restraint and an abridgement of his exercise of religion and freedom of expression is a mere rehash of the position he articulated in the underlying petitions for certiorari and expounded in his memorandum. Soriano for reconsideration of the Decision of the Court dated April 29, 2009, modifying that of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) by imposing the penalty of three-month suspension on the television show Ang Dating Daan, instead of on petitioner Soriano, as host of that program.