Nah. The only time anyone should ever mention 'choice' is when talkin about the choice to have sex or not.
No, people have continuous freedom of choice over their property, including their own body, unless they signed an explicit contract that limits their freedom. You can argue that it is immoral for people to have unprotected sex and then have an abortion, and I'll agree with you, but there is no logical basis for making it illegal.
You are FORCING a baby into this world. That's an iniation of force !
The baby did not ask to be brought in, had no say in the matter, and is defensless.
I wouldn't exactly describe the phenomenon of DeoxyriboNucleic Acid that results in the creation of a distinct human as "force". It is theoretically possible to "forcefully" create a large quantity of unique zygotes / fetii inside a cell culture dish (hundreds of thousands of oocytes can be extracted from a single female, only a few hundred of which are naturally released as eggs), but most pregnancies are a result of less deliberate circumstances. There are other plausible motives for which a penis can venture near a vagina.
Defenseless though they may be, those little cells are potential Rational Economic Actors only to the extent that someone is willing to incubate them. Life doesn't owe anyone a free ride.
That's like saying i can forcefully drag a peaceful person on to my property.
Tie him down. Blow his brains apart. Then claim he invaded my property.
A free society emerges along with certain prerequisite levels of technology - we cannot all have Rights if we're cavemen who can barely communicate with each-other. Rights are not based on pity, wishful thinking, nor any other emotion! They are a ruthless economic phenomenon that comes about when benefits of cooperation (aka non-violent competition) begin to constitute a competitive advantage.
Regarding your "abduct, murder, claim self-defense" scenario... There is a natural cost to legitimate ownership of property, which is the cost of securing it. Modern technology makes it possible to record objective evidence to establish what happened to a person - every cell phone should have a "panic button", and every gun should have a built-in camera (in addition to cameras on buildings, fences, space satellites, etc). This will create a certain standard by which your claim that "he invaded your property and you had to kill in self-defense" can be tested.
An abortion is a completely different scenario. There's no need to prove that a fetus is trespassing and refuses to leave, and it is impossible for a pregnant woman to evict a fetus without killing it - that medical fact is currently beyond dispute.