Now you are being ridiculous. If you go that far, there is no property without government - you don't even have more right to your heart or aorta then any other person or animal trying to claim them.
I wouldn't categorically deny that either. That said, physical goods are rivalrous, which creates the necessity for some kind of mechanism for preventing conflicts. This is unlike "intellectual property", which is based on the argument that we might, maybe, get more stuff in the future if only we give these people a monopoly over all possible copies, derivations and implementations of abstract ideas - and in violation of physical property rights.
