“Again, speaking about the hijab. I don’t care about no burkas or niqabs I agree they’re ridiculous.” It is not about ridiculous or not. It is, for me, the necessary neutrality in some workplaces i.e. Civil Servants are bound to be. A Jewish can argue that a Muslim Judge will be discriminatory (we had the case where the Defendant refused some juries because they were allegedly Jews).
The fact is there is confusion between fashion and religion I agree.
However, as it is impossible to decide what is what, the ban of all ostentatious religious symbols where neutrality (which is an active principle, not a default one) has to be enforced.
“and you don’t need Islam to tell you to commit such things.” I agree. But you can’t avoid the problem that if a Holly (or even a common law) book tells it is right to do so you have a problem with the text.
“A Muslim who does not admit that this book has contradictions is uneducated and in denial.” Agree. But in the texts I read, or debate I listen, a lot of them just ignore that the Koran (final? Version) took some editing and time. And these are the majority. I have the debate in French of one Muslim scholar who just say what you say, but he is in a minority.
I grant you that Media prefer to invite the others, it makes more audience.
If you speak French, a really good debate:
https://youtu.be/1r7LGzkulEg
Bookmarks