Looks like they did.
Is this normal policy to not air religious ads? They turned down the $3 million for it, too, of course.
Is this normal policies for the networks? Or is this a false story?
Well, all i’ve read on this particular incident is the story you linked to, but it wouldn’t surprise me very much if it were true. There are quite a few stories from past years of the Superbowl network refusing to air particular advertisements that might be considered controversial. And it’s not just during the Superbowl. We’ve discussed some of these incidents on the Boards, like this one.
Back in 2004 CBS refused to air ads for MoveOn.org and PETA during the Superbowl.
You posed a question in the thread title and then answered in your OP. So what’s the question? Do you suspect that the Washington Times made up the story? If so, here’s an article from the New York Times on the same story.
FYI, the Fixed Point Foundation, which sponsored the ad, has links to many articles on the story on its website.
When someone mentions John 3:16 in connection with football I think of the guy in the clown wig (who’s now serving prison time).
Yeah, it turned out he was batshit crazy. (Who would have guessed?)
Wait a minute, I saw that commercial during the Super Bowl. It wasn’t banned.
Uh, I was trying to keep my question short. I am asking if the story is being correctly reported.
Yeesh, calm down.
A minor point. I don’t Fox had the legal authority or will to actually ban any ad. They just didn’t choose to play the ad during their program.
Technically speaking to ban something means to legally prohibit something from happening.
Was it up to the local stations then?
Mahaloth, in that case it could be that upon it not being accepted for one of the national network feed’s ad slots, they then shopped around the local stations for spots on *their *allotted advertising space.
Certainly hope so. Maybe they need a better quote. I vote for Judges 1-19. 
It was also played in the DC market. No idea if it was a local ad slot or a national.
I would assume that although they may have “turned down” $3 million for the ad, there were other companies quite happy to take the slot and pay an equal amount. I would be quite willing to be their decision didn’t cost them millions of dollars.
They didn’t ban anything, obviously local affilliates ran that ad in their markets, but it makes it sound more pervasive and evil if they act like this is an attack on Christianity rather than, “No thank you I have half a dozen other options from major national companies who buy advertising all season”.
I bet that main network feed is also going worldwide where in many cases would run afoul of laws that do prohibit religious advertising or certain religious advertising.
I guess that’s it.
Honestly, mods, I think I have my answer. Fox denied it, but the affiliates could choose to air it during their affiliate commercial time.
Case closed. Let’s move on. 
Oh, thanks, everyone.
I very much doubt that broadcasters outside the US air the same commercials. Most likely, they show local ones.
I know for sure that Canadian broadcasters don’t show the Super Bowl commercials due to regulatory concerns. See this article.