Earlier, someone said that only overt, obvious religious icons were banned, and someone could wear an inconspicous religious symbol, like a cross or a star of david on a necklace or whatever. Therefore, since some religions do not require the wearing of overt religious items, and some do, the government is discriminating against the religions that have a certain 'uniform' so to speak.
I'm not comparing it to truancy-- I'm saying that the girl in question has one of three choices--
1. Be a truant, and stay true to her religion, breaking the law
2. Go to school wearing religious garb, staying true to her religion, and breaking the law
3. Go to school not wearing religious garb, betraying her religion, and obeying the law.
I'm a little confused on your stance here-- are you saying a country that bans all religious items is no worse than a country whose citizens relieve themselves inside the nation's borders? Huh?