All of those stones would be beautiful. The concern with choosing a stone for everyday wear is with scratches, cracking, chipping, and breaking. I've seen what happens to an emerald ring that has been worn every day, and it's not pretty. They don't last well at all, getting scratched and chipped and ugly very easily. They just aren't hard enough. A friend of mine chose Tanzanite because she thought it was beautiful, and only 3 years after she got married it broke. Depending on how romantic you are and how sentimental you are about things like that, it might bother you to have your wedding ring's stone require replacing or be recut in order to look beautiful 5 years after the wedding. Those stones are fairly cheap, though, so as long as you're aware that it may need replacing in the future and you don't mind that, then you could go with a softer stone.
I've been reading some threads on a gemstone and jewelry board because we've discussed not getting a diamond. There are some examples of some terrible looking gemstones from daily wear and tear. It isn't recommended to go too far down the MOHS scale when seeking a ring for everyday wear, which is the reason that sapphires and rubies are the stones usually recommended for engagement rings, unless you're willing to not wear your engagement ring every day or you don't mind replacing the stone. I suggest doing your research first to see how easily a particular stone will break, chip, scratch, or bruise before you make a decision.
Particular setting can help protect a soft stone, such as bezel settings like this one that encases the gem and helps protect it:
PLATINUM BEZEL SET DUAL WIRE EURO-SHANK DIAMOND ENGAGEMENT RING
My friend's stone might not have broken if she had chosen a setting appropriate for the hardness of the stone for daily wear, but she chose
an open setting like this (hers was more beautiful, but you get the idea) and it only lasted 3 years. She was the first one to warn me about getting a harder stone.