At least not in Illinois. Or New Jersey, or other states, apparently:
The Illinois statute, modeled after a New Jersey law, requires anyone selling or producing halal food to register with the state for a $75 fee and fill out a disclosure form by checking off boxes indicating how the food was obtained and who certified the product as halal. Since New Jersey passed the nation’s first halal law in 2000, similar laws have taken effect in nearly a dozen states.
How in the world can this be constitutional? The state is not, or at least should not be, responsible for enforcing religious dietary laws. Do they have a similar requirement for what is, and isn’t kosher? If they do, it’s just as bad. Somehow, the Jews have managed to keep kosher in this country since its founding without having to involve the government. Why can’t the Muslims? This seems like creeping sharia to me.
Where’s the ACLU? I thought that they always came down with both feet over this kind of thing? Or is that only when there’s a Christian creche on a lawn?
[Update at 3:30 PM EDT]
OK, reading the comments, I’m scratching my head.
No, this is not just about enforcing against fraud.
In order to enforce against fraud, the government must prove there was fraud. In order to prove that fraudulent halal foodstuff was purchased, the government must prove that said foodstuff was not halal. In order to do that, the government must provide a legal standard as to what is, and what is not, halal. In other words, the government must put its imprimatur on whether or not a particular foodstuff meets a certain religious dietary restriction, in effect playing the role of a (in the case of the Jewish religion) Talmudic scholar.
Do you folks really want to open up that can of worms?
Church A promises me that if I attend it and give it money, and subscribe to its beliefs, I will live a happier life. Does anyone here propose that the government should prosecute that church for fraud if in my opinion it doesn’t meet its promises? Whose definition of halal (or for that matter kosher) should the government choose?
Sorry, but to me, this is nuts. Not to mention completely and thoroughly unconstitutional. At least if you believe in the concept of “separation of church and state.”
And to the poster who asked why Good Friday is a state holiday, beats me. I don’t think that the government should be granting religious holidays, either. Though at least in that case there’s a much better consensus on what day Good Friday is, and there is a huge majority of people who celebrate it, so (like Christmas) it makes sense at least on practical reasons.
[Wednesday morning update]
I’m properly corrected in comments. I should have written “observe Good Friday,” not “celebrate” it.