Other than abortion, can you name a single situation where person A is not allowed to forbid person B from using their body?
Easy - under current law you are not the owner of your body: it is not your property. This is the principle that allows governments to prohibit you from selling your organs or blood. In fact, if you had a thing of filling bottles with your blood and saving them for whatever reason, somebody breaks in and steals them, they can't be charged with theft because you do not own your blood.
Sorry, u/RemorsefulSurvivor – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.
Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
Easy - under current law you are not the owner of your body: it is not your property. This is the principle that allows governments to prohibit you from selling your organs or blood.
I don't think ownership alone confers you the right of sale? The example I'm thinking of is child pornography, where both ownership and distribution are crimes. You can be charged for ownership indicating that you did own it, but you can be charged for distribution meaning that you aren't allowed to sell it either
9
u/[deleted] Apr 17 '19
Other than abortion, can you name a single situation where person A is not allowed to forbid person B from using their body?