Hence my use of "own" in quotations - they metaphorically "own" the part of you coverd by the contract
__________
And metaphorical "owning" is NOTHING like actual "owning", so your entire comparison of "owning" in a contractual sense with "owning" in a slavery sense is made meaningless. Unless you are suggesting that slaves, in Biblical times, were only "owned" metaphorically.
***And metaphorical "owning" is NOTHING like actual "owning"***
Wrong - because you can still legally deprive a person of their liberty.
See post 426