(b) The essence of the decision and the difficulty in it:
As I have noted, I do not believe that it is the role of a court to determine in detail the appropriate tests that are supposed to guide the municipality in such a decision. The court should not determine whether the emphasis should be placed in the decision on the historical aspects of the Jewish people in general, or of the city in particular, or specifically on purely religious aspects, or rather to reduce its considerations in accordance with the examination of the type of population in this or that part of the city.
It seems that the question of whether a municipality can order a ban on the sale of pork touches on another consideration. The pig has become a symbol. In my view, the justification for this, and the reasons for it, are not important, and certainly not of decisive importance, in the context of the work of judgment. Consciousness is a fact. It is what is important, not its causes or causes.
Hence, the Knesset's decision about 45 years ago to enact the Accreditation Law, against the background of the developments in the cases of the High Court of Justice mentioned above – a decision that has not been revoked to this day – is not necessarily an attempt to balance the feelings of a certain person with the freedom of an anonymous person, but rather an attempt by society to define itself. Legislation of self-determination.
The desire of a society to define itself through a symbol whose roots are in religious law is an act of great importance beyond the details of the specific law. This must not be taken lightly. The goal determines the proportionality and reasonableness of the decision. The degree that does not exceed what is required cannot be measured without defining all the relevant interests, including the social interest. The individual has the right to define himself. This definition includes being an individual within the whole. After all, the guiding term is "the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state."