You know, that's a rather narow view of "property." It's certainly in line with contemporary American thinking, but still a narrow view. The concept of "private property" is itself a recent historical innovation, and even within the framework of "private property," people don't necessarily do whatever they want with "their property."

Some kinds of property are used and eventually discarded as "personal property," in accordance with one's whims. Some people view all property through this lens-- even the land and it's resources.

Other types of property are held in private possession, to be used and enjoyed while one is alive, and then passed on to future generations. Under this view, the person "owning" the property is mindful that the property is not "personal property," but is only held in stewardship, to be used and enjoyed, before being passed on to future generations. Examples of this view of property include the land and its resources, as well as other types of property, such as art.

Who would think it a reasonable use of "property" for a private "owner" to repaint a Van Gogh to suit his whims? The Van Gogh, is, after all, his "property," to do with as he pleases, and yet I suspect that many who unthinkingly put forth the meaning-laden phrase "it's your property" would take nevertheless take offense at the destruction of "property" that is held in stewardship for future generations.