I first saw this Washington Post article via the Corner (hush, I need to get my Miers news!). Ampersand has a very thoughtful response to it. For this pro-choicer, it seems like a very easy decision to make; if we contend that a woman should not be condemned for choosing to abort if she couldn't handle having a non-disabled child, why should the calculus change when we know that the child is disabled? Surely we don't have more of a duty to carry disabled children to term than we do non-disabled children?
Speaking of abortion, here are some links to organizations that provide financial assistance for poor women who want abortions in Texas.