It's still gonna be discriminatory if you're banning all religious schools. It's also not realistic like Catholic schools won't allow that lol. You can be socially acceptable toward Muslims and say keep all faith schools open including theirs in lieu of looking discriminatory. Or just straight up say shut certain faith schools down. The former would work if very strict policies were applied. The latter is a proposal to shut just mosques down, and an effective solution but not socially acceptable so it's not realistic either.
The realistic and effective solution would be:
-keep them open, and make sure the new policies are strict and adhered to, or they get fined or shut, simple (they have to be English language, and it's possible because Bibles originally weren't in English either
so they can get off the Arabic crap; they have to have non-foreign funding so take or leave what the gov't might set aside if they can't raise money on their own; they have be casually open and friendly to the non Muslim public; regulatory checks that can't be fought kinda like drug tests for people on probation, etc).
-or a plan b, which is shut everything down dammit, lol and gently implement Islamic teaching to pubic schools now that there are no mosques. But that's out of the kindness of our hearts of course
I do know the US has religious freedom yet at local levels many mosques were shut down or prohibited from being built with no double jeopardy/second chances to contest it.
Why can't we do that? I'm not totally sure about here but there they have "church is separate from the state" so for churches there would have to be public (building funds/donations) and private funding, and in mosque's case foreign funding. I say cut off foreign funding because that **** is dodgy.