In x-rating the TV program of the petitioner, the respondents failed to apply the clear and present danger rule . In American Bible Society v . City of Manila , this Court held: “The constitutional guaranty of free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship carries with it the right to disseminate religious information. Any restraint of such right can be justified like other restraints on freedom of expression on the ground that there is a clear and present danger of any substantive evil which the State has the right to prevent.” In Victoriano vs . Elizalde Rope Workers Union , we further ruled that “. . . it is only where it is unavoidably necessary to prevent an immediate and grave danger to the security and welfare of the community that infringement of religious freedom may be justified, and only to the smallest extent necessary to avoid the danger .” The records show that the decision of the respondent Board, affirmed by the respondent appellate court, is completely bereft of findings of facts to justify the conclusion that the subject video tapes constitute impermissible attacks against another religion. There is no showing whatsoever of the type of harm the tapes will bring about especially the gravity and imminence of the threatened harm. Prior restraint on speech, including religious speech, cannot be justified by hypothetical fears but only by the showing of a substantive and imminent evil which has taken the life of a reality already on ground .
3. Exemption from union shop Victoriano vs. Elizalde Roper Workers Union FACTS : Benjamin Victoriano (Appellee), a member of the religious sect known as the “Iglesia ni Cristo”, had been in the employ of the Elizalde Rope Factory, Inc. (Company) since 1958. He was a member of the Elizalde Rope Workers’ Union (Union) which had with the Company a CBA containing a closed shop provision which reads as follows: “Membership in the Union shall be required as a condition of employment for all permanent employees workers covered by this Agreement.” Under Sec 4(a), par 4, of RA 975, prior to its amendment by RA 3350, the employer was not precluded “from making an agreement with a labor organization to require as a condition of employment membership therein, if such labor organization is the representative of the employees.” On June 18, 1961, however, RA 3350 was enacted, introducing an amendment to par 4 subsection (a) of sec 4 of RA 875, as follows: “xxx but such agreement shall not cover members of any religious sects which prohibit affiliation of their members in any such labor organization”. Being a member of a religious sect that prohibits the affiliation of its members with any labor organization, Appellee presented his resignation to appellant Union. The Union wrote a formal letter to the Company asking the latter to separate Appellee from the service because he was resigning from the Union as a member. The Company in turn notified Appellee and his counsel that unless the Appellee could
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 24 pages?
- Fall '16
- Atty. Schneider
- The Bible, Supreme Court of the United States, The Court, academic freedom