EDITORIAL - Pornography

The Provincial Women's Commission, headed by provincial board member Agnes Magpale, has adopted a resolution asking the provincial board to craft an ordinance that would penalize the publication of pornographic materials.

We have no problem with that, except that the commission proceeded to name Banat, a sister publication of this paper, and the rival Sunstar Superbalita as examples of publications that dish out pornographic materials.

First, it is unfair to publicly name anyone or anything as a publisher of smut without first clearly defining what smut is, or the parameters by which it may be considered as such, an act sought to be punished by an ordinance that has not yet even seen the light of day.

Second, it violates the legal rights of anyone or anything to be pronounced guilty even before the fact, or considering that, in the absence of an ordinance that has yet to be made, both Banat and Superbalita were already singled out as targets of a law that is yet to be.

We cannot speak for Sunstar Superbalita, but Banat, as a member of the Star Group of Publications, the largest print media organization in the country, adheres to the tenets of good and responsible journalism.

As such, it does not shirk on its responsibilities to the public and has not lost sight of its obligation to help promote only that which is eventually good for the country and its people.

In its fourteen years of seeing print, Banat has never been embroiled in any controversy regarding the direction its publishing principles are taking. In fact, its publishers have, over the years, remained in good standing with the Church, the only credible witness for goodness.

Because the proposed legal action is still up in the air, we would like to dismiss this unfortunate incident as the result of a misappreciation of visual and intellectual impressions. Our wish at this point is for those entrusted with crafting laws to know whereof they speak.