Governments are not masters of their citizens; this presupposes some greater claim over the body of individuals than the individuals have, which is patently untrue and can be demonstrated by the fact that people will die rather than submit to tyranny. No one has a greater claim on your body than you do. By using that as a comparison for the mother and baby, your justification on those grounds falls flat. Government, like war, is not a necessary evil.

Your other arguments about wanting the best career and best life you can for yourself, which will thus translate to the best life possible for your child if you decide to have one, also falls flat on its face. Your personal convenience and aspirations are not justification enough for ending human life.

While you do make a case for comparing human life to animals at the slaughter, this cannot possibly be taken as an argument in favor of abortion if the act you're describing is cruel and immoral. If that wasn't your intention, I apologize, but that seemed to be the tone of the argument. If that's the case, why would you advocate expanding cruel and immoral acts to unborn children as well?

The only argument that you presented which carries some weight to it is this notion that "killing people is sometimes okay." This is absolutely true; if someone initiates physical violence against someone, it is moral for that person or any other person to defend against it, up to and including the use of lethal force. At best, though, this is an argument for abortion strictly in situations where the fetus' continued development poses a severe risk of irreparable harm to the mother, including death.

I want to address the rape argument separately, as this is a very loaded discussion. Yes, rape is perhaps second only to murder on the scale of worst violations of bodily control. Anyone who's denying this is either lying, or is a sociopath. However, if a child results from the act, is the child responsible for it? Was it somehow an accessory to it after the fact? The child isn't initiating violence against the mother, however it does place an unwanted burden on the mother in terms of sapping nutrients away and creating tremendous physical changes within her body. This is one I have difficulty with. Ultimately, I err on the side of life in favor of protecting the fetus, but it's not nearly as clear as I want it to be.

None of my rebuttals, however, are arguments in favor of laws banning abortion. I don't recognize the legitimacy or authority of states, so don't take my counterarguments as supporting legislation; it's not. They are, however, arguments on whether or not abortion is moral or immoral. Like all acts of killing, there are precious few instances where any moral justification can be found for it.