Roe v. Wade allowed women in all states access to abortions. The court overturning Roe v. Wade does not merely reverse this; it allows the government to take jurisdiction over women’s bodies, and by extension, all of our bodies.
Dear Friend and Reader:
When studying the chart for the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood on June 24, it’s tempting to study the immediate aspects involved. Unlike many Supreme Court decisions, the chart is accurately timed, for 10:11 am. I’ll come back to it soon.
As for the immediate social effects, this decision is a product of the digital age. This is in all respects, including how quickly the effects will take hold. It seems about half of the states already have, or are going to impose, restrictions on abortions, meaning that they will take jurisdiction over the bodies of women of child-bearing age.
Young women who don’t know the history of their grandmother’s and great-grandmother’s struggles to attain some semblance of equality in society will now have to figure out what they have lost since Roe v. Wade was decided 49 years ago. It was the closest thing American society had to the Equal Rights Amendment. That was defeated in the early 1980s by a movement of conservative women who were convinced that if it passed, their daughters could be drafted, and that they would have to share bathrooms with men [related article here].
Moon Conjunct Uranus in Taurus
There are two ways to consider the astrology: in the immediate sense, and in the long-run — the next generation or so that we will be living with and adapting to this reassessment of what the body is, and who owns it.
In the chart for the decision, we see a conjunction of the Moon and slow-mover Uranus in the late 9th house, in Taurus. This can be read as the influence of religion (a 9th house matter) on the affairs of government (a 10th house matter) — and on women’s bodies (the Moon and Taurus). A radical shift in values is also involved (Uranus in Taurus).
The conjunction to Uranus is approaching; it has not happened yet. That looks like the sudden awakening to the fact that society is changing rapidly (Uranus means rapidly and unexpected). It also looks like “woman’s body (the Moon) meets computing device (Uranus).”
Religion and government are supposed to be kept separate by two different parts of the Constitution (the “no religious test” clause, and the First Amendment). This chart demonstrates the overlap between government and religion, to the point of being the same thing.
It has been the “religious right” — both the fundamentalist Protestant movement, and the Catholics — who got this result, through years of organized, dedicated, single-minded political action in and around church.
This was happening while the so-called women’s movement concerned itself with banning pornography at the Canadian border, endlessly performing The Vagina Monologues, complaining about “manspreading” and “mansplaining” and the “male gaze,” and waging the #metoo movement against anyone convenient. They gleefully attacked other feminists on trans- and gender-related issues.
The study of women’s history morphed into “gender studies,” to the detriment of teaching the actual history of women. This was all well and good enough (for some), except for one thing: on the other side, serious activists worked toward a focused, nearly impossible goal — and they got it.
Religiously-driven political actors have waged war on the right of a woman to end a pregnancy since long before Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. They claim they are protecting the lives of the unborn, with little consideration of already-living women and their circumstances. And it seems that once someone is no longer a fetus, they are on their own.
I am aware of the many problems with what is being called the “abortion industry,” including the medical and pharmacological use of fetus body parts. My colleague Jon Rappoport has done an excellent job covering this matter (here is one article, and here is another). The Dobbs decision is not going to stop this practice. There will still be abortions, including in states where it is illegal, and what the medical industry cannot source in the United States or in certain states, it will source elsewhere. If it is not clear by now, they are not bound by the law.
Saturn on the 7th: The Court Imposes Itself on Private Matters
We’ve seen more of this thinking recently, such as in the 2014 Hobby Lobby case, which held that a corporation can decline to offer a benefits package that includes birth control to women on the basis of the owner’s religious values. We live in a time when the “freedom of religion” is interpreted as “my freedom to impose my religion upon you.” That was not the original idea.
It is tempting to look at Saturn in Aquarius, looming on the western horizon of the Dobbs chart, as the government imposing itself in the most private matters of intimacy in relationships (the 7th house), and on health choices (the 6th).
This happens a lot. Many of the truly memorable Supreme Court decisions in living memory have involved such private matters. Many people think this is what the Supreme Court is for.
Here is a quick tour. Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965 permitted the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restrictions. Yes, within my lifetime, and probably yours, a married couple could get arrested for using a rubber or birth control pills.
Loving v. Virginia in 1967 held that it was unconstitutional for state laws to block interracial couples from getting married. Today, interracial relationships are practically mandatory — many TV commercials portray a mixed-race couple to signal how woke we all are, and thereby sell their product. (Notably, both Griswold and Loving were decided under the influence of the revolutionary Uranus-Pluto conjunction of the 1960s.)
Of Consensual Sodomy and Gay Marriage
In Lawrence v. Texas in 2003, the court blocked governments in the United States from imposing criminal sanctions on what used to be called “consensual sodomy” — to wit, oral and anal sex. The court had previously held that couples could be criminally prosecuted for such actions in the privacy of their own bedrooms.
That was a result of the Bowers v. Hardwick decision from 1986, which cited the Holy Bible. That decision held that the Constitution does not grant anyone the right to eat pussy. I don’t think that’s what they were trying to stop.
Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote in a concurring decision that sodomy (by which he means dudes having sex) is “the infamous crime against nature” and an offense of “deeper malignity” than rape, “the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature,” and “a crime not fit to be named.” That was in 1986!
Anyway, the ridiculous Bowers decision was repealed after just 17 years, which is extremely rare. But the court went there.
We are all familiar with the celebrated Obergefell v. Hodges, decided in 2015, which assured that gay people have the same marriage rights as heterosexual people.
No more skim milk civil unions for queerfolk! Obergefell relied upon the equal protection precedent set in Loving v. Virginia. It only took 48 years after Loving for the court to figure out that everyone is entitled to loving.
The smartest people in the land are sometimes a little slow. Take heed, however: all of the above decisions are now subject to reversal — particularly Griswold and Obergefell.
Then there are the various rulings on “obscenity.” When all is said and done, the Supreme Court thinks you can say more than you can do. That’s another article, about some toys in the attic (here in the days of the Dark Web). Summing up the obscenity line of cases, Assoc. Justice Potter Stewart wrote in a 1964 decision, he cannot really define obscenity (which does have a definition that is impossible to meet). “But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.”
This Chart is About Pluto in Aquarius
However, we are living under another jurisdiction now, which is the result of what you might call the “digital revolution.” This has happened, and it’s happening again — Pluto in Aquarius (2023-2044) is about the effects of technology on the population. We are entering the age of full-on augmented, enhanced and synthetic “reality.”
The plans include many forms of merging humans with computers, social credit scores, and total surveillance. We are already most of the way there. Technologists see this as being about finishing the job and new possibilities.
The digital age is not about memes and pizza profiles. It’s about what you think your body is. For the past 30 months, we have seen this dramatized as false diagnosis of “infection” by an artificial intelligence device (the PCR “covid” test). The “covid” test analyzes a sample from a human body for some genetically engineered code that never existed in nature. So what if it’s wrong all the time; a computer said it.
This was immediately followed up by a corresponding “vaccine” that its manufacturer compared to computer storage, software and applications (mRNA technology). All of this landed on a population conditioned by 25 years of overexposure to digital technology, which infiltrates every aspect of our lives and has most people living in a dream world or hallucination.
Roe was a Product of the Television Era. Dobbs is about the Digital Era.
The Dobbs decision is happening in a different time in social history and the history of medicine than did Roe v. Wade. That is all the difference in the universe. Under digital conditions, people are far more subject to individual control than they were in the 1970s.
Additionally, from a political perspective, prosecuting a woman for murder for terminating a pregnancy was not a consideration at that time. It is very much one in our times.
A related problem with making abortion illegal is what happens to the women whose miscarriage is alleged to be intentional. Miscarriages happen a lot. States that determine that abortion is homicide will have an interest in every pregnancy that does not end in birth.
The question has always been about who and what the enforcing authority will be.
That question is now easily answered. In the digital world and under the power of Pluto in Aquarius, that enforcing authority will be artificial intelligence. We are living in a different time, with all new possibilities for those who would control us.
The core decision that Dobbs overruled was Roe v. Wade. This was from the era of the Women’s Lib movement, which was 1960s-styled activism provoked by iconic, old-style “boob tube” television. It had the opposite effect of what we were told.
Much that we witnessed from the 1950s through the 1970s was instigated by society’s psychological response to TV, which, at the time, drove dramatic participation in real-world events.
We half-expect to see this same kind of enthusiastic participation today — such as resistance to the overturning of Roe. But now we are in the digital environment, which provokes its own kind of involvement — in more digital. Today, the answer to everything is: let a computer do it. AI has the answer; the right person for the job is a robot. You do not need to be personally involved.
There is digital breath analysis that can allegedly predict “infection.” We have recently read about “cough analysis,” which claims to assess whether one has an “infection.”
Tracking, Tracing and Metagenomics
During the crisis of the past 30 months, there was a lot of talk about contact tracing apps, which means tracking people with their phones (such as at protests). There are the various types of Green Passes and medical passports that would allow you access to a place (such as a college campus), if you have the right certification of the right injections of digital code (mRNA nanotechnology) at the right time. These are all connected to massive databases, and you are personally followed around by GPS.
There is digital breath analysis that can allegedly predict “infection.” We have recently read about “cough analysis,” which claims to assess whether one has an “infection.” And of course, there is the standard-fare nose swab test based on metagenomics.
That is what created an AI theoretical model of a virus nobody has ever found in physical form, which the PCR “diagnoses” using none other than artificial intelligence. There is no end to this; there is never any end to technological “innovation.”
The technology is only part of the problem. Most of the problem is how it convinces people that it’s the ultimate good; the ultimate truth. The problem is the mentality that allows and facilitates what would otherwise be seen as completely insane and invasive. I would remind you that any society that can ban abortion can also make it mandatory. The question of Roe was, “whose choice is this?” And if it’s not your choice, it’s the government’s choice.
You may know that Roe v. Wade was based on a privacy concept of constitutional law. This has been reversed in a time when digital conditions already mean there is absolutely no privacy. Everything that goes online ends up in databases and our behavior is tracked with every move.
Many who stood for “health freedom” are celebrating the Dobbs decision; many who chanted “my body, my choice” supported the coerced injections of their neighbors and their children’s school teachers and everyone else.
Dobbs is about All People
Now, if abortion is murder, how would the government manage data about millions of pregnancies a year? What would be the enforcing authority? Under Pluto in Aquarius and full digital conditions, they will be apps. This would include software, for example, that you can use to report a pregnancy, and apps that allegedly detect one. (Many women already use fertility tracker apps, so we are halfway there.)
Finally, we already know that we’re being force-fed graphene oxide in various pharmaceutical products (masks, capsules, injections and potentially, swabs). Graphene is injectable nanotechnology that can be read and written by an electromagnetic field (such as wifi or 5G). I first read about something close to this in WIRED magazine 20 or so years ago. It is not new. And it does not take much to see the full-on Black Mirror potential of all this.
While the Dobbs decision pretends to be about protecting fetuses and omits the impact on actual living women and their families, that is a cover story. It’s the diversion that riles up nearly all politically invested people on one side or the other. Many who stood for “health freedom” are celebrating the Dobbs decision; many who chanted “my body, my choice” supported the coerced injections of their neighbors and their children’s school teachers and everyone else.
Today, there is no moral standing either health freedom OR my body my choice; that has been surrendered, and for most people, either position is hypocritical. And it is all obviated by omniscient, omnipresent, all-seeing artificial intelligence technology.
The Dobbs decision is about the government claiming to take ownership of women’s bodies, and therefore, of all of our bodies. Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood did indeed protect the right of women to choose whether they wanted to carry a pregnancy to term. But that power of choice is being taken away in a whole other world, and with another world of possibilities.