Does the French ban on face veils raise larger questions about the unreasonable demands of organized religion?

If, for example, it is a function of the State to protect the individual’s liberty from unwarranted coercion, then there will be times when the public interest, as represented by the State, collides with the interest of religious leaders. Why should we accept that there is any special value in "religious freedom" ; a person’s religious freedom is just one of his personal freedoms. There is no logical reason why "religious freedom" should be in a cl of its own, accorded unusual immunity from intervention by the State. For too long we have tiptoed around the demands made by organized religions of all types, from their own subsidized schools to the bending of State laws to suit their own rules (eg Sikhs being excused the wearing of a helmet when riding a motorbike). State law takes precedence over religious law, end of story.