This is the kind of story that makes me confused.

A 32 year old Moroccan, married to a French citizen and mother to three children in France, was refused French nationality for adopting a radical practice of her religion, which is socially incompatible with the basic values of France, notably the principle of gender equality.

It goes on to say...

The government commissioner says that her statement show that she leads leads a
secluded life, cut off from French society. She does not know about laïcité or
the right to vote and she lives in total submission to the men in her family.
Faiza M. appears to think that this normal and doesn't think of contesting this
submission. Prada-Bordenave says this is indicative of the lack of adherence to
the basic values of French society.

I don't think countries have to make anybody who wants in into a citizen. Countries have the right to try to retain their distintive culture. I don't expect Israel to let in absolutely anybody, or even Saudi Arabia. So France shouldn't have to, either.

And this woman, who doesn't believe in gender equality (which is very important in France), and who advocates total submission (as opposed to biblical submission) is out of context from French values, and does represent an existential threat to the state.

So I'm glad France is stepping up.

But on the other hand...what's to stop France from saying that Christians who believe the Bible are also not compatible with France? Isn't that where this is also going? It is a slippery slope.

I totally believe in freedom of religion, but I also believe Islam is misogynist. We shouldn't allow genital mutilation or polygamy or automatic male custody in divorce cases just because Muslims believe in these things. But once you've said that, how can we then ask governments to respect Christian norms?

This just gets very confusing. I wish people could just use common sense, but that doesn't work anymore.