There is no simpler way to state what should constitute a law as being acceptable or not. If the people in a given place, be it a nation, city, state, region, county, or otherwise decide that it should enact Sharia law as part of state law, then this should be the law. It is important to note however that it should not be mandated for all people. For example, if one is not in agreement with the law then they should not be susceptible to it. It should be something which one agrees to for religios reasons, not something which is forced upon another.
Sharia Law supports hatred and pedophilia, and murder to those who disbelieve in muhamed's words. Muhamed married a SIX YEAR OLD GIRL, AND RAPED HER WHEN SHE TURNED NINE! Sharia law should be banned, and if this muslim's want to be able to kill Christians, and rape 9 year old's go back to your hell hole of syria.
If "state" means a U.S. state, then part of the answer is that courts already can and do apply foreign law in some contract based situations, which can thus be influenced by sharia law. In that case, the answer is "yes," because contractual obligations that aren't inconsistent with our constitutional and legal limitations in the U.S. ought to be enforced. However, sharia law should never become a part of any U.S. state's statutory law or common law, because our government is to be secular, free of the dictates of any one particular religion.
If "state" simply means the political apparatus, then the answer is less clear. Law is generally better than lawlessness, and sharia can provide a basis for the rule of law. At the same time, the rigidity, inequality, discrimination, arbitrariness, and harshness that body of law sometimes embraces undermines its usefulness for lawful governance. Although this body of law is a fact of life in a sizable fraction of the world, ultimately its usefulness in developing lawful governance depends on people who look outside of sharia to guide how they believe sharia should be molded--a concept that is anathema to many who follow that body of law. So, no, it's not a desirable body of law.
If there is any place that religion needs to be absent it is in our law making and our law enforcing. Just because a religious group thinks its people, or maybe all people, need to be governed according to religious law does not make that the right thing to do. If Sharia law is enforced, then every fundamentalist faith will want the same right.