What is the ruling on abortion if the mother is suffering from a contagious disease such as AIDS?

The Shaykh : Also, this is a second introduction.
I return to say: No scholar is incapable of answering a question like this, because a question like this has been addressed in other simple, and very simple, matters, namely: abortion without there being a disease that the fetus inherited from its mother, as you described, or a germ or something similar. What is the ruling on abortion?!
The scholars of Islam have studied this throughout these centuries, and their answer is: if the soul has been breathed into it, then it is the killing of a soul, which is not permissible, and it is the minor infanticide. If the soul has not been breathed into it, it is permissible, but it is disliked. And there is something in the legal terminology called: 'azl (coitus interruptus). And 'azl at that time was a self-evident, innate act, which is: the man has intercourse with his wife, and when the time for ejaculation comes, he pours his water outside the vagina. And on this basis came the hadith of al-Bukhari from the hadith of Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: And among the objectives of the Shari'ah, when it encouraged marriage first, and then permitted marrying more than one woman by the well-known verse: Among the wise objectives of the Shari'ah is increasing the population of the Muhammadan Ummah. To confirm this wonderful objective, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: For that reason, it is disliked for the spouses to resort to the means of 'azl before the soul is breathed in, because in that is a decrease of the population of the Ummah and a contradiction of this wise objective among the objectives of the Shari'ah when it commanded marriage and the increase of marriage, and commanded marrying the fertile and loving. So if this is among the objectives of the Shari'ah, the Muslim is eager to respond to the intent of the Shari'ah, unless there is something that justifies for him not to realize such an objective. Then, in that case, one looks at what he argues with regarding his distance from realizing this objective. If it is merely to give the wife rest, as is the reality today for many men and women when they complain of the wife's fatigue from frequent childbirth, then if he practices 'azl, there is no harm in that. But this thing is disliked due to contradicting the wisdom of legislation we mentioned earlier.
As for if the abortion, whose introduction is ejaculation, is after the soul has been breathed in, here the problem arises, because in it is the killing of a soul into which the soul has been breathed. So your question was very clear: is abortion permissible if it is established that this fetus is afflicted with that microbe or disease?
And the answer is easy for the scholars: as long as it is before the soul is breathed in, it is permissible, even if such a justification and medical reason do not exist.
But I return to say: does this attempt make us, as you said and placed the word in the wrong place, like the ostrich that ignores the hunter? No, the matter is not so. But we ignore the cause that led to this, if this exists now in some Muslim families. We ignore the original cause that led to the existence of such a disease, and we think about deriving a legal ruling, and it is said: what is the ruling on abortion? We must not let our treatment of some sores coming out of the body distract us from treating the disease from its root, which is the cause of these sores. This is like the disbelievers who treat these phenomena and then do not try to eradicate the disease from its root. So we say that this is a permissible matter.