Page 1

E.M.O. Zine The Publication of the Experimental Media Organization October 2012, Volume VI: Issue I

In This Issue: -Marijuana Legalization -Abstinence-Only Education -Workers’ Rights

-Government-Funded Violence -Left Solidarity -African Colonialism

In This Issue:

-Is Colorado About to Legalize Marijuana? by Will Rorke—page 3 -An Appeal to Reason: The Case For Left Unity by Julia Soares—page 4 -School of the Americas: Government Using Our Tax Dollars to turn Latin American Soldiers into Dictators and Assassins! by Manahidy Soler—page 5 -Assault on the Pan-African Working People by Toivo Asheeke—page 7 -Students Organizing Against Reynolds: An Open Letter to Walmart by Kai Wen Yang—page 8 -Technically, Abstinence is 100% Effective. Teaching it? Not So Much by Melissa Chew – page 9

Interested in contributing to E.M.O. Zine? Please email for submissions and more information! OR Attend our weekly meetings— Thursdays at 7:00 PM in the EMO Office (UUW B07—New Union Basement) SA CHARTERED

Like us on Facebook:

Thanks to: Contributing Authors Listed Above Editors: Melissa Chew, Julia Soares All images used belong to and are credited to their owners, including (cover image)

Is Colorado About to Legalize Marijuana?_ by Will Rorke On November 6th, Colorado voters will decide whether their state will enact the most progressive marijuana drug policy to date. The initiative, dubbed "Amendment 64," would amend Colorado's constitution to regulate the consumption, possession, and growing of marijuana for individuals over the age of 21 within the state. If passed, the amendment would enact a policy resembling the current regulation of alcohol. The amendment also includes a tax, which will be used to allocate at least $40 million dollars to Colorado's public schools. In addition, Colorado's hemp industry would be regulated separately from the production of marijuana with psychoactive effects. A recent poll by the Denver Post showed that 51% of Colorado's eligible voters supported “Amendment 64.” Although Colorado and the rest of the nation seem to be leaning towards ending marijuana prohibition, there are opponents to the Colorado ballot initiative who have a direct stake in keeping marijuana illegal. Opponents of the provision, including Colorado governor John Hickelooper and law enforcement agencies, seem to be mounting a last-ditch effort to defeat the amendment. These opponents hold that marijuana is an addictive drug and that the dangers of marijuana outweigh the benefits. Psychosis, hallucinations, loss of personal identity, and cognitive impairment are consistently cited by opponents as reasons to maintain marijuana's current status in Colorado. A study by the Colorado Center of Law and Policy (CCLP) estimates that if the provision were approved by Colorado voters, then law enforcement agencies could stand to lose 4.4% of their budget—funding currently used to prohibit the trafficking and use of marijuana. Ironically, Governor Hickelooper also has a stake in the provision not passing; the governor has made a living by selling a legal drug—he was a founder of the Wynkoop Brewing Company. Other opponents of "Amendment 64" are quick to point out that if the amendment were to pass, then Colorado law would conflict with federal

law, lead to more driving while under the influence, and be more accessible to children. It’s true— "Amendment 64" would contradict federal law and increased availability to marijuana could lead to more drugged driving. However, the evidence does not support their claim that regulation would make marijuana more accessible to adolescents. Studies by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse found that teens have much easier access to marijuana than beer. This is largely due to the prohibition of alcohol's sale to individuals under the age of 21.

While opponents worry about the impact of marijuana's legalization on Colorado's young people, proponents of the amendment point to the revenue that the taxation of marijuana will raise for Colorado's public schools. The text of "Amendment 64" designates the first $40 million of revenue raised by the marijuana tax for the state's "public school capital construction assistance fund." Simultaneously, the Colorado Center of Law and Policy estimates that "Amendment 64" would save Colorado's taxpayers' an additional $12 million per year. Additionally, Harvard economists estimate that if the amendment's provisions were extended nationally, then taxpayers could save $7.7 billion dollars. Stephen Easton, an award-winning economist, estimates that legalization of marijuana could generate around $45 to $100 billion of additional taxable revenue for the federal government. With potentially huge budget cuts looming on the horizon, how can the federal government afford not to follow Colorado's lead, and move to legalize, regulate, and tax the sale of marijuana?


An Appeal to Reason: The Case For Left Unity _ by Julia Soares Whether or not we want to see it, it’s clear that the political right is more organized both on this campus and nationwide than the left. There are many causes of this, and they have to do with the structure of both sides. The right, for example, tends to have a lot more resources at its disposal; well-funded think-tanks and the backing of huge super-PACs and corporate interests. There also seems, however, to be an inherent problem with the left in that proponents of certain policies and issues tend to focus only on their pet issues. The environmentalists tend to care about the environment, the gay rights’ activists focus on gay rights and those concerned with war advocate for peace. There are always exceptions; of course, this is just what I’ve observed. The Occupy Movement seems to have taken on a myriad of issues: tax and campaign finance reform, gun-control, the end to U.S. imperialism and the like, but the main criticism for the movement from both sides is its’ inability to organize. Why this lack of unity? We seem to have been somewhat relegated to fight the effects of a broken system rather than the cause. We cannot, however, really fix anything without getting to the root of the problem. In a word, this problem is greed. The reason the environment is polluted and plundered, the reason workers are treated poorly and unions intimidated, vilified or torn apart, the reason public schools must endure budget cuts so millionaires can have an additional tax cut is corporate greed. The reason bigotry towards the LGBT community is encouraged in U.S. political discourse, the reason why women’s health is an issue debated by politicians instead of doctors, the reason why the word “terrorism” is used more often by our own government to scare us than by the “terrorists” themselves is similarly, political greed. Environmentalists, labor unionists, proponents of public education and universal health care and those of us calling for an end to military imperialism are all fighting different symptoms of the “illness” that is corporate greed and neoliberal policy. Neoliberalism is a movement toward economic deregulation and privatization— essentially using the “free market” as a solution for

most anything. This has allowed corporate interests—GE, Monsanto, BP to name a few—to pump poisons into the water we drink and the air we breathe because not acting like a sociopath will somehow hinder American industries’ ability to compete. The same goes for the stagnation of minimum wage despite rising costs of living and inflation as well as the ongoing abuses by big business of its workers through forced overtime and poor conditions. Corporations are essentially obligated to treat their workers and the environment as poorly as government regulations allow in order to maximize profits. High unemployment only helps to foster this even further because such companies can (and have) laid off large fractions of their workforce—due to the “poor economy”—and had the remaining employees pick up the slack for no additional pay. Why do they put up with this? With their job security even more unstable, workers have even less leverage for humane treatment. Under the system of greed, social services are cut to make room for tax cuts for the wealthiest. Public education is at constant risk of privatization under this neoliberal doctrine. Budget cuts tempt public schools to bring in private companies to fill in the budgetary gaps so corporate interests can profit off of their students. Access to health care is controlled by health insurance companies who’ve managed to convince the public that they can handle issues of heath better than both the government and medical professionals. The U.S. also backs oppressors abroad and has a long history of military imperialism for the protection and advancement of capitalism and corporate interests. Which oppressors the American government supports and who it opposes depends mainly on who will and who will not bow to or benefit the interests of American big business. Meanwhile rhetoric about “terrorists” who hate Americans because “they hate our freedom” is used to push a costly war for oil, not to mention a crackdown on our civil liberties. Terrorism as well as debate over marriage equality and abortion rights are all political ploys by


the powerful to scare the lay-voter into going against his or her own interests and create in-group cohesion. Will the gay couple down the street getting married actually threaten the “American Way?” Is forcing victims of rape (or questioning the legitimacy of that rape) to carry a pregnancy to term a part of our fundamental values as Americans? I’m doubtful, but others aren’t. The right cleverly uses the creation of an “other” to unify its base. Any social psychologist can tell you there is no better way to promote in-group unity than by naming and vilifying an out-group. “Baby-killing, promiscuous women,” “sexually-deviant gays” who threaten “traditional values” and “freedom-hating terrorists” get the job done quite effectively. The left has no such out-group, so to speak, which explains the present trouble. While leftactivists may have different driving issues, we all have the same core values: equality, justice and protecting the rights of the oppressed. I believe that the majority of us see that people are more important than power or possessions; that compassion outweighs greed. Our inability to recognize that more unifies us than separates us is the only thing stopping us from working together to achieve our shared goals.

dictators in its own backyard. This training facility was first called the School of the Americas. Here are some facts: ● The School of the Americas (SOA) is a combat training school for Latin American soldiers located in Fort Benning, Georgia. ● It was first created in Panama in 1946, but then later expelled in 1984 for violating Panama’s Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal . ● Since 1946, the SOA has trained over 64,000 Latin American soldiers in: ○ Counterinsurgency techniques ○ Sniper training ○ Commando and psychological warfare ○ Military intelligence ○ Interrogation tactics ● Graduates use these tactics to wage a war against their own people. ● SOA graduates target: ○ Educators ○ Union organizers ○ Religious workers ○ Student leaders ○ Others who work for the rights of the poor ● Hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have been tortured, raped, assassinated, “disappeared,” massacred, and made refugees by those trained at the SOA. ● SOA has thus been historically dubbed: “the School of the Assassins.” ● In 2000, an amendment that would have closed down the school to conduct a congressional investigation was defeated by the House of Representatives by a mere 10 votes. ● As a result, the School of the Americas was then replaced by the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC), but its principles and teaching techniques remained the same. Although this facility opened over 60 years ago, the damage that has been done by the SOA graduates is long-standing and continues today. Here are some examples of SOA grads in this year’s news:

School of the Americas: Government Using Our Tax Dollars to turn Latin American Soldiers into Dictators and Assassins! _ by Manahidy Soler America has been known to use its power to exert influence over other countries. They perform trade embargoes, use military force along with several other types of sanctions or actions. Unfortunately, it has also been known to implement its own U.S.-backed government puppets who have sometimes turned out to be total dictators. These dictators were actually trained by American soldiers, taught to use American terror and torture tactics right here on American soil. Yes, that’s right. The World’s biggest advocate for a full democratic government who also finds time to interfere with the sovereignty of other countries in the name of democracy is training


January 2012 - El Salvador ● “El Salvador’s Public Security Cabinet” replaced with SOA grads February 2012 - El Salvador ● Colonel and SOA grad Inocente Orlando Montano Morales, who was linked to the 1989 assassination of 6 Jesuit priests and was charged with lying on immigration papers which allowed him to live in the United States for the past 10 years. March 2012 - Guatemala ● SOA trained soldier Pedro Pimentel Rios was sentenced to 6,060 years for his role in the murder of 201 people. After the massacre he left to become an instructor at the School of the Americas. May 2012 - Honduras ● The new Honduran Police Chief is an SOA Grad who was accused of carrying out extrajudicial executions of suspected gang members. June 2012 - Ecuador ● Ex-chief of the Ecuadoran Military Intelligence Unit, Mario Pazimino Silva, an SOA student who graduated with honors, was taken to court for being accused of working for the CIA and leading a group dedicated to threatening journalists, human rights activists, and social leaders. July 2012 - Argentina ● SOA-trained dictators Jorge Videla and former General Reynalso Bignone were convicted for kidnapping the babies of executed and disappeared political prisoners. ● Under the military junta, over 30,000 people were murdered and their children about 500 were raised by security officers families after their parents were killed. August 2012 - Columbia ● Columbian general Rito Alejo del Rio, trained at the SOA, was sentenced to 25 years for murder. He also led a paramilitary raid to attack the guerrillas in the Uraba region of Columbia. ● Campesino Marino Lopez was captured and beheaded as a signal to his community.

Join us in Fort Benning, Georgia next month as we rally together to help shut down the School of the Americas! The School of the Americas’ graduates are overall responsible for the deaths, kidnappings, and disappearances of millions of people throughout Latin America since it was first opened in 1946. Former Panamanian President Jorge Illueca stated that the School of the Americas was the “biggest base for destabilization in Latin America.” The U.S government continues to perpetuate such violence through Latin American countries in order to protect their own capitalist interests. It is deplorable that a nation founded on democratic values and the rights of human beings is partaking in such events. What is worse is that this is happening inside of our country’s borders; in Fort Benning, Georgia, and will continue to happen if something is not done soon. We need your help! What you can do to help: Visit to learn more! ● SOA Watch Working Groups ● Local SOA groups ● Media outreach ● Student and youth groups ● Research ● Statements of support and solidarity ● Legislative Action ○ Help gain Co-Sponsors for HR 3368 Representative James McGovern from Massachusetts reintroduced the Latin America Military Training Review Act as HR 3386 on November 4, 2011 along with 21 other original cosponsors. HR 3368 will close down SOA for about 6 months and conduct an investigation of the military training tactics being used in Fort Benning. Talk to your representatives and gain support! There will also be an annual vigil taking place right outside the gates of Fort-Benning Georgia where the School of the Americas is located. There will also be several events and teach- ins and meetings and activities going on the weekend of November 16th- 18th. As I have attended the SOAW Vigil last year I can proudly say that it has been one of the


best experiences of my college career. It was fun as well as informative and I encourage everyone to come! Please contact me if you are interested: Thank you so much for taking the time to read about this prevalent violation of human rights.

In his seminal book, The Wretched of the Earth (1963), Frantz Fanon articulates a critique of the national (pseudo) bourgeoisie class in Africa as the class to lead the newly decolonized states’ development after independence. For Fanon, this class is insufficient for this historic mission because they do not have the material or intellectual resources to handle the national economy upon independence. They are completely useless as a class because they do not create anything, unlike the capitalist classes in the colonial states, and try their best to emulate the lifestyles of the bourgeoisie class in the colonial without being able to increase the productive forces of the African state. Due to this weakness, they are required to reach out to the big foreign companies and former colonial powers and through this relationship are transformed into an intermediary class that enables the former exploiters to access the wealth of the former colonies. This continues Africa’s domination by foreign capitalist interests and is the reason why, in his analysis, only when this class is overthrown and the machinery of the state is in the hands of the revolutionary intelligentsia in service of the African peasantry that Africa will truly be liberated. These sentiments are continued by Amilcar Cabral in his speeches “Brief analysis of the social structure in Guinea” (1965), “The weapon of theory” (1966), and “History is a Weapon: National liberation and Culture” (1970). In these, he highlights the fact that although the petty bourgeoisie is during the phase of national liberation the revolutionary class that must lead the struggle, it must commit class-suicide and be reborn as a revolutionary working class committed to the liberation of the productive forces of the African state from foreign control. Neocolonialism to Cabral is indirect colonialism, where the ruling class has been co-opted by the international capitalist class to serve their interests and not the interests of the people. In this situation the working classes must be the revolutionary class and seek to remove the petit bourgeoisie class from power in order to further develop the productive forces and create a more equitable distribution of the wealth of the state. Walter Rodney’s critique of the pseudo bourgeoisie class in Africa permeates his major works, but in particular, his essay “Towards the

Assault on the Pan-African Working People____ by Toivo Asheeke Why is Africa poor? Why is Africa today, in 2012, three generations after independence, still behind the rest of the world? How can we understand this? What needs to be done to solve it? Questions such as these capture the general debate on the African, but more broadly, the PanAfrican world. As a revolutionary Pan-Africanist theorist, the linking of the experiences of the PanAfrican working people is critical to any understanding of our current continued development of underdevelopment. Furthermore, this capitalist world economy, through the institutions of slavery, colonialism and neocolonialism has had the cumulative effect of underdeveloping the Pan-African world (its people and institutions) in order to develop the bastions of capitalist power located in core states of the world. So, we can think of developing countries (people and institutions) as developing, in order to keep the developed developed. There is an intricate process of relationships that defines this process which is too extensive for the special limits of this article. Due to this, I will focus today on one factor: the possession of the machinery of the state by the African petty (pseudo) bourgeoisie class that enables this process of underdevelopment to be carried out within the PanAfrican world. A return to the source of some earlier literature that identified this problem of the petty bourgeoisie class during the time of independence, I believe, is in order, then, for us to grasp this hidden yet visible manifestation of continued domination of the Pan-African world by vicious monopoly capitalism.


Sixth Pan-African Congress� (1974) and his book The History of the Guyanese Working People (1980). In the former he advocates for a PanAfricanism that is representative of the Pan-African working classes, and in the latter to construct a history of the working people of Guyana. A unifying theme of these works centers on the critique of the petty bourgeoisie as a class incapable of commanding the economic development of PanAfrican states. Echoing Fanon, Rodney writes that this weakness requires that this class seek external (former colonial) assistance which facilitates the continued oppression of the working people and in order to foment dissension amongst this social group, the tools of racism and ethnicity are used. However, unlike the previous two authors, Rodney launches into a blistering critique of the acceptance of the imperialist borders of Africa as handicapping the freedom of the people of Africa at the moment of independence. The acceptance of these borders was essential to the national petty bourgeoisie class to maintain their power and influence at the top of the socioeconomic food-chain, and they had no problem aligning themselves with capitalists of the former colonial powers to ensure their continued dominance. This has manifested itself in the constant pumping of foreign investment, loans, Structural Adjustment Programs, etc., into these African states. These policies have subordinated the economies of many African states to western capitalist interests, and in doing so, have silenced the representation of the African working class. It must be remembered that the national petty bourgeoisie class, the 1% for lack of a better term, benefits from these policies because their investments and political power are protected because of these programs at the expense of the 99% going through further hardships with the annihilation of the welfare state. Just recently, the platinum miners in South Africa went on strike demanding higher wages and after some violent clashes with the police, the mine fired 12,000 miners for daring to seek an increase in pay. It is clear that the working people in Africa are under assault and are systematically being disempowered within the state. Amilcar Cabral, Frantz Fanon and Walter Rodney were some of the first Pan-Africanist

thinkers to provide groundbreaking initial critique of the African petty bourgeoisie. Perhaps a Cabralian return to this source of this knowledge would be able to provide valuable insights for analyzing the current state of the Pan-African world and facilitating the radicalization of the working people of the Pan-African world, who are indeed the wretched of the earth and the toiling masses. These are the people who seek liberation and they shall get it. Aluta Continua! Students Organizing Against Reynolds: An Open Letter to Walmart _ by Kai Wen Yang Students Organizing Against Reynolds (SOAR) is a student network and it is a part of the Ain’t I a Woman?! Campaign coalition. SOAR sees students as a part of the working people who are exploited. We are the figures of the unpaid intern, the domestic worker, the office worker, and the unemployed. The network is composed of many individuals who share the same interest to improve our living and working conditions by demanding the end of mandatory overtime. In the long-term, our goal is to eliminate the sweatshop economy altogether.

SOAR recognizes that corporations have taken a hold over our public education system, as more and more universities and colleges have become privatized, and as our tuitions and student loans have kept on skyrocketing. At the same time, corporations are not held accountable for promoting sweatshop practices across the nation and worldwide. Reynolds, Pactiv and Walmart have unashamedly supported and organized sweatshops in the past and presently. We must now hold corporations accountable: (1) Sweatshop practices have to stop, (2) A public education must be accessible for all


and student loans/debts must now be forgiven. If you are interested in getting involved with SOAR, you can visit us on Facebook or contact us through email. For more information: treynolds

We urge you to immediately cease all contracts with Reynolds and join us on the national boycott against Reynolds by taking all products produced by Pactiv and Reynolds OFF THE SHELVES in all of local Walmart chain stores.

Dear Walmart Store Manager:

Sincerely, Kai Wen Yang Emanuel Marshack SOAR Representatives

On June 14, 2012, the Ain’t I a Woman?! Campaign launched a national boycott against Pactiv Corporation and its parent company Reynolds Group. We, the students, have learned that Pactiv forced over a hundred workers, mostly Latina and Chinese women, to work long hours in sweatshop conditions, with no time even to use the bathroom. When the workers began to organize for better working conditions, Pactiv retaliated against the organizing efforts. Pactiv instituted production “speed ups” at the factory and imposed new rules that meant to weed out the leaders and sympathizers. Eventually, 60% of department workforce was fired, and the remaining workers were forced to work overtime to pick up the work. Many students are working in similar conditions and are forced to work overtime. We are saddened by Pactiv’s sweatshop practices not only in its Kearny, New Jersey location, but also elsewhere. Pactiv Corporation and Reynolds Group are promoting and spreading sweatshop practices across the country. They operate over 40 factories in North America alone. In Illinois, they crushed a unionized group of workers who tried to improve working conditions, and the company even closed down the factory and relocated to exploit more workers. We, as Students Organizing Against Reynolds, a student network, DO NOT want sweatshop practices in Pactiv. We DO NOT want sweatshop across the nation, in our communities, and in our job places. We are joining the Pactiv workers to demand the right to take bathroom breaks, the right to sick days and parental leave, the right to organize without retaliation, the reinstatement of all the workers who were fired, the right to a 40-hour work week, and NO MANDATORY OVERTIME.

Technically, Abstinence is 100% Effective. Teaching It? Not So Much _ by Melissa Chew After years of abstinence-only sexual education, some schools are finally beginning to teach curricula that inform students about various methods of contraception. This is due to less federal funding for these programs, but more importantly, simply the fact that they don’t work. These programs are based in Christian values, but are being taught in public schools. No-sex-untilmarriage education is ineffectively teaching teens how to prevent unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Grants created under the Obama administration support programs that discuss both abstinence and contraception. These programs have been proven to be effective, including new and innovative approaches to combating teenage pregnancy. It’s crucial that young people are given the tools to help them succeed academically and make better life decisions, especially about sex. These programs would replace abstinencecentered policies funded by Republican-controlled Congress in the late 1990s and under President George W. Bush, which had cost $1.5 billion. In 1997, when Senate Bill 1 was enacted, Texas lawmakers left the decision on whether or not a school has sex education up to individual districts. However, the bill has a certain criteria that a school must abide by when choosing the curriculum: present abstinence as the preferred choice of behavior for unmarried persons, and devote more attention to abstinence than to any other behavior. Instead of providing facts, programs used fear and shaming, dramatized the risks of STD’s, and promoted gender stereotypes. A majority of students were receiving no information


whatsoever about human sexuality. Many programs incorporated values of Christian morality in their curricula. In 2004, U.S. Congressman Henry Waxman (California) released a report that provided several examples of false information being included in federally funded abstinence-only sex education programs. Some of these errors included: ● Misrepresenting the failure rates of contraceptives ● Misrepresenting the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV transmission ● Claims that abortion increases the risk of infertility or premature birth for subsequent pregnancies ● Scientific errors (such as stating there were “twenty-four chromosomes from the mother and twenty-four chromosomes from the father”) The results? Teen pregnancy went up – even higher than before abstinence-only teaching. By 2007, Texas ranked first in teen birth rate in the nation, third in young people with AIDS, and fourth in teens with syphilis. Clearly, evidence has shown that abstinence-only programs have not helped lower the teen pregnancy rate or the likelihood of teens having sex. A 2007 Mathematica Policy Research study showed students in abstinenceonly programs are not more likely to abstain from sex, delay having sex, or have fewer partners than those who received no sex education at all. There’s no hiding that abstinence-only teaching is heavily influenced by religion. Historically, all the major branches of Christianity generally condemned contraception. This kind of “sex education” is based on the idea that birth control is a sin, and that intercourse must be “free, total, faithful, and fruitful,” which is impossible when it is not in context of marriage. The biggest advocates for abstinence-only in schools are Religious Right organizations, such as Focus on the Family, True Love Waits, and The Silver Ring Thing, a nationwide no-sex-until-marriage program supported heavily by the Christian Church. One Texas sex education handout was entitled “Things to Look for in a Mate.” This handout had clear religious implications. For example, one of the questions was, “What does the Bible say about sex before marriage/premarital sex?”

The answer cited over ten different Bible verses: “Along with all other kinds of sexual immorality, sex before marriage/premarital sex is repeatedly condemned in the Scripture (Acts 15:20; Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13,18; 7:2; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7)”. Why is something that is rooted in religion being taught in our public schools? The greatest threat to separation of church and state is in the public schools, the very place that Americans first learn the values of freedom and tolerance. The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause says students should never be given the impression that any one faith in particular, or religion in general, is officially sanctioned or preferred. Citations of Bible verses in classrooms clearly breach this law. Those who are particularly vulnerable to this are students from minority religions. No one feels more out of place than a Jewish or Muslim child forced to participate in or remove himself from Christian-oriented activities. At the same time, a Christian child may have his own way of worship dictated by schoolteachers and government officials. Neither of these is good for religious or personal freedom, a value on which our country was supposed to be founded on. When the dispute over religious practices in the classroom take place, the quality of everyone’s educational experience diminishes. It’s true that abstinence is 100 percent effective in the prevention of pregnancies and contracting diseases and infections. However, teaching it as the only method is just not effective. Teaching abstinence to teens has proven to fail to prevent unplanned pregnancies. The information that is being taught in these programs is inaccurate and shouldn’t even have had a place in the public school system in the first place. contact:


Interested in contributing to E.M.O. Zine? Please email for submissions and more information! OR Attend our weekly meetings— Thursdays at 7:00 PM in the EMO Office (UUW B07—New Union Basement) SA CHARTERED

Like us on Facebook:


E.M.O. Zine, October 2012  

Volume VI, Issue I