By JP Moreland
Scriptorium Daily
The first slogan assumes that ownership of something justifies a right to use it as one wishes with, of course, certain limitations (I can’t drive my car through your living room window). For centuries, in Western ethics and law, ownership has justified use because ownership was obtained by one’s mixing one’s labor to gain that ownership. If one works to make something or to earn the money to purchase it, then one has the right of ownership over that thing. Now, if a Creator-God exists, none of us, including women, own our bodies in the sense relevant to right of use. God does. Since he made it, he owns it. Now renters have certain rights delegated to them by owners, but they do not have owner-rights just because they rent or use something. The same goes with our bodies. Just because we “rent” or use them, that does not give us the right of ownership. God has that right. If God does not exist, then there is no such owner. So the slogan is empty since it masks the real, fundamental issue: Is there a God who has ownership over our bodies, has he declared anything relevant to what renters can do regarding abortion, and how does one know the correct answers to these questions? This is where the debate should reside, not over misleading slogans about owning one’s body. (more)
