If you have not yet read Dr. Mohler’s blog from yesterday, The Scandal of Gendercide – War on Baby Girls, I recommend it.
What is amazing is that he is commenting on an article, War on Baby Girls: Gendercide, in The Economist, a secular publication that believes “in free trade and free markets. . .”
Here is some of what The Economist reported:
It is no exaggeration to call this gendercide. Women are missing in their millions—aborted, killed, neglected to death. In 1990 an Indian economist, Amartya Sen, put the number at 100m (one hundred million); the toll is higher now. The crumb of comfort is that countries can mitigate the hurt, and that one, South Korea, has shown the worst can be avoided. Others need to learn from it if they are to stop the carnage.
Why is this happening?
In fact the destruction of baby girls is a product of three forces: the ancient preference for sons; a modern desire for smaller families; and ultrasound scanning and other technologies that identify the sex of a fetus.
Why write about it on this blog? Because those three forces, only slightly altered, could just as easily have been written about the destruction of children with disabilities. Is there any material difference between the three forces described above and these three that result in amazing rates of abortion of disabled babies in our country?
- The ancient preference for a ‘normal’ child
- A modern desire for family members that don’t inconvenience us too much, or who experience too much suffering
- Ultrasound scanning and other technologies that identify a disability in the fetus.
When we become untethered from the Bible, which describes the eternal, foundational, unchanging character and attributes of God and his view of his creation, human beings lose their God-granted value and dignity. Babies become expendable, whether we are talking about girls in China or children with disabilities in America.
The Economist argues that girls in these countries can be saved through economic and educational interventions. I didn’t find a similar argument being made for children with disabilities.
I would recommend a different solution for both: Exodus 20:13 “You shall not murder.”
The Works of God 
One of our sons has taken on the topic of eugenics in speech competition in the original oratory category. He has used this point of the destruction of little girls in his speech and linking it with disability. It is not an overstatement to say that he has met resistance.
This is a great blog you got here. The theme looks nice, awesome color combination.
Again, thank you for your voice here. Part of the problem for people in regards to disability is that too many times people are not able to value caregiving. Sometimes as I help my adult son with his needs , I am struck by the intimacy involved and I am blessed with the realization that we all seek intimacy with God and that God offers us just that. It is a blessing to not shy away from caring for the disabled. I humbly offer that this has been where I have most met God and seen His blessings.
I pray that this is what others see in my life with our son.
So yes, I agree with your post regarding terminating the life of a disabled unborn child.