Marriage through in-laws with a Muslim Arab woman

To Rabbi Michael Avraham, Shalom Rabbi,
I have a halakhic question: Is it permissible to live a married life through marriage with a Muslim Arab girl, according to the sources I will cite. I saw your answer that prohibits marriage with Gentiles, but I did not see any reference to these sources.
Idolatry Page 1 Page 2:
“What kind of resident alien? Anyone who has taken upon himself in the presence of three friends not to worship idols, the words of the Rabbis; and the rabbis: Anyone who has taken upon himself the seven commandments that the sons of Noah took upon themselves; others say: These did not come under the rule of resident alien, but what kind of resident alien is this? This is a resident who eats venison and has taken upon himself to fulfill all the commandments stated in the Torah except for the prohibition of venison; wine is reserved with him, and no wine or even is kept with him in a city where the majority of the people are idol worshipers, but wine and even are reserved with him in a city where the majority of the people are idol worshipers, we have called it. We have called it sd”d? From whose oil is it a wine offered? Rather, wine is as we called it. And everything else – then he is like an idol worshiper; Rabban Shimon says: It is wine offered, and I said to her: It is permissible to drink; Katani who is it: And all the rest of his words, then he is like an idol worshiper, why does he walk? Isn’t a dembel of idol worship like an idol worshiper! “Arn Bar Yitzhak: No, to grant permission and revoke permission;”
It seems, therefore, that a resident ger, who is defined by the Sages as one who observes the Seven Commandments of the Children of Noah, is considered a Jew for everything except granting and revoking permission. If so, we would ostensibly say that it is also possible to marry a resident ger.
I will also bring from the direction of idolatry page 10 and page 2:
“Gopa, said Bali, said Avimi, it is derived from the Shema of the Derab: Pitan and Shemanan, wine and their daughters, all of them are from eighteen things. Whose daughters are they? Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: They decreed that their daughters should be removed from their cradles. And Gniva from the Shema of the Derab said: They decreed that they should all be removed because of idolatry, because Rav Acha bar Ada ar Yitzchak said: They decreed that they should be removed because of idolatry; from what is the meaning of the word “sheman”? Rather, pitan and shemanan are from the wine, and from the wine because of their daughters, and from their daughters because of another thing, and from another thing because of the word “da”. Their daughters – it is from the Torah, as it is written: You shall not marry them! From the Torah, seven nations, but the rest of the idolaters are not, and it is not, and it is decreed even from the rest of the idolaters. And from R. Ben Yochi who said: If he turns your son away from me – including all the devotions, who is there to say? “But from the law of women, through marriage, and he is not cut off even through fornication.”
It should be noted that here, as I believe, it really says “Gentiles” and not “idol worshipers” and is about Christian censorship, and yet – the reason for the prohibition is “for no other reason”, that is – because of incitement to idolatry. Rashi writes: “And their daughters are forbidden for no other reason – idolatry.” And this is clearly the reason also from what is said in the quote above – “including all devotion”, where here it seems that Rashi ben Yochai did not even say that all Gentiles are forbidden, but only those devoted to idolatry.
If indeed the reason is a fear of incitement to idolatry, then in the case of a nation that singles out God and does not even agree with the belief in cohabitation like Christians, this reason seems to be invalid. Here I would say, just as we say that women are allowed to be cantors because now there is no problem of “out of respect for the public,” and that homosexuals are prohibited from sleeping under the same sheet because, despite being Jews, they were nevertheless “suspected of having slept with a man,” then if there is no danger of idolatry through marriage with a Gentile, since she and her nation single out God, then the decree prohibiting marriage is irrelevant to her.
In my opinion, it is clear from the issue that the issue of Nashga”a and Nashga”z is only within the framework of a discussion about coming through prostitution and not about marriage through marriage (which can also be interpreted as adultery from the perspective of formal halakhah). This is a continuation of the discussion of “But the Torah does not prohibit marriage through marriage, and it is not even prohibited through prostitution.”, meaning that it prohibited through prostitution within the boundaries of a virgin, a gentile, a slave girl, and a man’s wife.
You can also get reinforcement from the Mayari on the website – (Beit HaBechira, Avoda Zara page 10, page 2:)
“We have already explained above that wine is simply forbidden from the beginning because of a marriage, but since they saw that the law of the land was binding on them, they became stricter about it by prohibiting it from coming and causing slight impurity, as explained above. And what they said in the last chapter is that the wine of a resident alien is like ours, and even though there is a parasha because he does not observe gentile contact, most commentators agree with the parasha because of a marriage. From there, the later sages of these scrolls learned to prohibit drinking wine of a few cubits, even though they are not worshippers of the Law and they are monotheists, as explained above:”
According to the Meiri, there are two reasons for banning resident wine –
A. Because of contact with a Gentile (say, a friend of a resident alien who is not a resident alien, as Rashi says about a resident alien in the work of idolatry, page 132, page 2, “He is a wine of wine offered – he does not observe the contact of a worshiper of idols.”)
B. Because of in-laws The reality that the Meiri describes is that the sages somewhat prohibit wine places for resident gentiles (Muslims and Christians).
If only one of the reasons were sufficient to prohibit wine, then wine would have to be prohibited everywhere. But the Meiri writes in “these scrolls,” that is, in the binding of both reasons together, then it is understood that there are places where wine is prohibited solely because of gentile contact, but only that this reason is not sufficient because the very fact of gentile contact with wine is prohibited solely because of daughter-in-laws, as it is said, “And upon their wine because of their daughters.” And precisely thus, wine is prohibited.
According to this understanding, the Meiri did not fear at all intermarriage with a resident Gentile, but only the contact of a Gentile who worshipped idols with the resident Gentile’s wine, which is forbidden because of intermarriage with a Gentile who worshipped idols.
Thanks in advance,
A.