No moral and legal permissibility are not the same. Moral permissibility is what is morally allowed and legal permissibility is what is legally allowed. An act can be morally permissible but can also be against the law.
Basically in a short way "Moral permissibility is asking is it morally allowed
Legal admissibility refers to the permissibility a certain object that is presented in court of law is allowed to be considered as "evidence".
Legal norms and moral norms can coexist and sometimes overlap, but they are not always the same. Legal norms are enforced by the legal system, whereas moral norms are based on individual or societal beliefs about right and wrong. In some cases, legal norms may reflect moral norms, but in other cases, they may diverge.
No. Ownership implies legal permissibility of the control. The US occupied Iraq from 2003-2011, but did not own it.
He thought that it was a moral issue
Not necessarily. Morals are, by definition, more subjective than the law. You may have a moral obligation to do something for which there is no legal punishment available at all. Maybe you have a moral obligation to give your children presents as your money may permit, but there is no legal obligation to give them more than the necessaries, even if you are filthy rich. In other cases you may have a moral obligation that merely creates a separate and distinct legal obligation. For example, you may have a moral obligation to perform services on a contract, but you cannot be physically forced to actually perform. The only "legal obligation" would be to pay for damages caused by your failure to perform, if any. Therefore, even if there is a legal obligation stemming from such a moral obligation ("you gave your word"), they are not the same obligation.
You may dispose of your own property any way see fit as long as it is legal. Most all states have laws governing "games of chance." Be sure you check into the permissibility of this before you run afoul of the law.
A main legal, or moral requirement
The difference between legal rules and moral rules has to do with laws and how we behave regarding a moral code. Legal rules are based on laws that are set forth for us to follow. Moral rules have to do with a person's ethics. For example, it is not illegal to keep money that is found, but a person of high morals might try to return the money to the proper owner.
Not necessarily. While some legal duties may arise from moral obligations, legal duties in euthanasia are primarily established by statutory laws and regulations that govern the practice. These laws can reflect societal values and ethical considerations, but they do not always align with individual moral beliefs. Therefore, not every legal duty in euthanasia is directly founded on a moral obligation.
No a Moral isn't the same thing as a lesson. It sort of is but not by much.
i think that moral obligation seem more important than legal responsibilities because moral obligation is the duty or responsibility in which he feels honour that why i think that moral obligation seem more important than legal responsibilities.