Coalition Of Ghanaians Living Abroad has endorsed the passage for the passing of the anti-LGBTQ+ bill, which is currently before Parliament.
According to the group LGBTQI+ orientations are neither universal nor natural rights adding; “Natural rights or God-given rights are rights given to every individual by virtual of you being a human being or a creation of God, including speech, movement, association, and marriage.
A statement copied to Peacefmonline stated that “Ghanaians are determined to see the passage of the Bill on promoting proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values.”
“We shall make it clear that European pets are pests in Africa. They cannot force their preferences on us. We want to encourage our Members of Parliament to be bold to defend the dignity and proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values by rejecting any form of western cultural imperialism through the anti-LGBTQ+ Bill,” portion of the statement read.
Read the full statement below;
The Coalition of Ghanaians Living Abroad in Support of Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill has noticed with excitement a directive from the leadership of Parliament of the Republic of Ghana through the Speaker that the entire process leading to the passage of the Anti-LGBTQ+ Bill will be public. We are particularly excited to know that the sitting of the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee, the debate on the floor of Parliament and votes of all individual Members of Parliament will be public.
We would want to pledge our unalloyed support for the Bill that seeks to protect Ghanaian cultural values and the dignity of our nationhood and marriage. The Coalition would like to use this opportunity to clarify our stance and contribution to the debate on the Bill. We are in full support of the Bill, and the following are our grounds:
1. LGBTQI+ orientations are neither universal nor natural rights. Natural rights or God-given rights are rights given to every individual by virtual of you being a human being or a creation of God, including speech, movement, association, and marriage. LGBTQI+ orientations are emerging rights in some societies, and the fact that some countries have extended rights to a particular behaviour does not make it a universal right. , Every emerging ''right'' is subject to the values of a country and the general acceptability of that so-called rights. For example, even in Europe, where rights have been extended to activities of LGBTQ+, not all the orientations of LGBTQ+ have been given legal recognition. How many European countries have passed legislation to accept queer orientations such as bestiality, transage and transabled? Does this not smack of the hypocrisy of the West? How can they pick and choose from the shelves of LGBTQ+ but disrespect others for declining to tolerate any form of LGBTQ+ orientation?
Ghanaians will not accept such a condescending attitude from the West.
2. LGBTQ+ orientation does not reflect the cultural values of Ghana. It is trite that every law must reflect the values and aspirations of the people the law seeks to serve. About 95% of Ghanaians are intolerable and do not consider any LGBTQ+ orientations as behaviours that should be tolerated in any Ghanaian community. Again, even in Europe, where bestiality is essentially a crime, Finland tands alongside Romania and Hungary as EU countries where sexual intercourse with an animal remains legal. Is this also a human right? Most human rights are subjective and culturally relative. Whiles polygamy is legalised in Africa; it is criminalised in most Western countries. It’s a classic case of someone's meat being another's poison.
3. Most arguments in favour of LGBTQ+ defy common sense and reasonableness. A popular view by the LGBTQ+ community and allies is that people must have the right to love or be attracted to whatever they choose to like. They ask; how does a consenting sexual relationship between two adults of the same gender affect another person? Yet, these same people find 2
everything wrong with polygamy simply because it is not their cultural value. So we also ask; how does a decision of two or more women consenting to marry one man or vice versa affect another person? Do these western countries consider their cultural values superior to ours? Again, if it is alright for any two consenting adults of the same sex to have a sexual relationship, why would the European Court of Human Rights rule unanimously in June 2016 that homosexual marriage is not a universal right, but such requests must be subject to the laws of the contracting country yet the same court upholds heterosexual marriage as a universal right?
4. The 18 academics are consistently inconsistent in their argument. They claim they are only oncerned about the criminalisation of fundamental human rights in the Bill, and that should not be construed as they promoting LGBTQ+. Yet, in their memorandum to Parliament, they are proposing to Parliament to reject the Bill in its entirety. How can they claim to suggest changes to a bill they want to be rejected entirely?
Is it not mind-boggling when the respected Prof. Emerita Takyiwaa Manuh, an LGBTQ+ champion, says she disapproves of same-sex marriage? Yet, she is moving from one TV station to another advocating for the right of homosexuals? The same Professor disapproves of sodomy but approves of homosexuality. In all countries where LGBTQ have been legalised, same-sex marriage and adoption rights are the next things the LGBTQ+ community demand.
How can you approve of a sexual love affair between people of the same sex but disapprove of their marriage? These inconsistencies bring to the fore the question of the real motivation of the gang of 18 academics.
We have also heard the pro-LGBTQ+ argue that they support the criminalisation of incest. How much more inconsistent can they be? Suppose there is nothing wrong with a sexual relationship between consenting adults of the same sex. How then will a consenting sexual relationship between a mother and her adult son be a problem?
5. Passage of the anti-LGBTQ+ will not affect Ghana's human rights credentials. Some Ghanaians are afraid to support the Bill because they are worried about the image of Ghana in the eyes of countries that recognize LGBTQ+. For those who think the passage will give Ghana a negative international image, did Europe and America consider their image with Ghana and Africa when they passed laws to recognize LGBTQ+ orientations in their countries? Who appointed the West the human rights police of the world? We will not pass laws in the interest of countries that neither share nor respect our cultural values and identity. 3
6. The passage of the Bill will have no dire economic consequences: The noise of Ghana losing economically from the enactment of the anti-LGBTQ+ Bill is nothing but an illusion. No country in Africa is part of the top 15 recipients of FDI from the US. Although the UK is considered a major foreign investor to Ghana, Ghana is not among the top 70 trading partners of the UK. Ghana is the 77th trading partner of the UK, accounting for 0.1% of total UK trade in the first quarter of 2021. With all the resources God has blessed us with if Ghana cannot survive without LGBTQ+ money, what is our worth as a country? The passage of the anti- LGBTQ Bill is meant to safeguard our cultural values and identity and a call to assert our political and economic sovereignty.
7. LGBTQ+ is not just about sexual orientation. It seems that the debate has been limited to homosexuals and bisexuals, which are individuals who engage in sexual relationships with people of the same sex or those who are sexually attracted to both the male and female gender.
The other alphabets such as transgender and Queer are even more problematic. A person's gender is genetically determined and cannot be changed by the mere feelings of a person. Is it not ridiculous for a genetically male person to wake up and say he feels like a female, so he must be recognised as such?
What kind of society will we be building for ourselves by recognizing pangender, a term for people who feel that they cannot be labelled as female or male in gender, genderless human beings? What about the transabled? Do we want to have a society where people who feel born disabled will be allowed to break or amputate any part of their body parts to become a person with a disability? The question is, how well have we been able to cater for even those who have natural disabilities and those who have accidental disabilities?
Now, let’s analyse the queer people who identify as transage. Transage means that a child of 13 years can say she feels like 55 years and must be recognised as such legally. In the same way, a 58-year-old can identify as 19 years and must be recognised as such simply because that is how s/he feels. Imagine a situation where a 58-year-old man who identifies as a 19-year-old engages in sex with 13-year-old a girl who also identifies as 55 years. Can the man be charged for rape or defilement, or paedophilia? On 7th November, 2018, the Telegraph published a story of a 69 year-old Dutchman pensioner who identifies as 45 year-old who is in court asking for his age to be changed according to his feelings. (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/07/dutch-man-69-identifies-20-years- younger-launches-legal-battle/). As if that is not enough, there are others who feel like they should have been born animals and take steps to adopt the behaviour of animals in line with heir orientation. The list of LGBTQ+ absurdities is endless. Are these the kind of things we
want to tolerate and recognise in Ghana?
4 In essence, the support and recognition for LGBTQ+ in Ghana means that we have to reverse
some of our laws on incest, sodomy, marriage, paedophilia, prostitution, bestiality, among others, to accommodate the lifestyle choices of LGBTQ+.
8. The criminalization of LGBTQ+ and their related activities is not an abuse of fundamental
human rights. Currently, incest is a crime in Ghana. Will it not be a crime for any person or group of persons to be promoting incest? Will it also not be a crime to form an association of people with incestuous desires? In the same way, once a law is passed against LGBTQ+, it makes the promotion, advocacy, and gathering of people with such orientations illegal.
In most parts of Europe, comments against LGBTQ+ are considered homophobic or promotion
of hatred against the LGBTQ+ community. More so, if it is discovered that a person is married
to more than one man or woman in Europe, such a person will face prosecution simply
because polyandry and polygyny are illegal in Europe and America. If anti-LGBTQ+ activities
and comments are criminalised in the West, who are they to tell us that we are abusing the
rights of the LGBTQ+ community by also criminalising pro-LGBTQ+ related activities?
More so, the bill seeks to protect the LGBTQ+ community from mob attacks. Almost on daily
basis, we are inundated with stories of attacks against people suspected to be LGBTQ+.
Although such attacks are criminal, the perpetrators are hardly punished. The Ghanaian
society keeps blind eyes to such acts thereby providing moral support to the attackers since
there are no specific laws that deal with most manifestations of LGBTQ+. This bill will give
more impetus to existing laws that provide protection for individuals through education and
the need to allow the law to handle such matters
9. There is nothing wrong with the criminalization of some issues of morality. Sodomy and incest
are supposed to be private, but they are criminalised in our criminal codes. Ghana is incurably
religious, and we recognise the critical role religion plays in shaping our moral and cultural
values. The religious argument in opposition to LGBTQ+ is not the first in our law books. The
word sodomy which finds expression in the criminal code of Ghana, originates from the
biblical city of Sodom. Again, Ghana is not the first country to criminalise behaviour based on
religion. The word sodomy is neither Twi nor Dabgnani or Ewe, and Europeans were the first
to reference a biblical account of the activities in Sodom and made it a criminal offence. In light
of this, the Coalition expresses its support to the call by the church and all other religious
bodies to ban all manifestations of LGBTQ+ activities in Ghana.
10. The argument that Ghanaians should not be interested in what happens in private is palpably
flawed. People’s private actions and choices have implications and collateral impacts on the
larger society. People's private lives have an effect on socialization, public culture, and
morality. People's private lives must not offend public health, public safety and public,
morality. The individual who seeks their human rights to be protected has the responsibility to
protect society's social and cultural values and contribute to society's moral well-being.
Therefore, as long as the activities of LGBGTQs do not sit well with the social and cultural
values of a society in which that individual lives, such personal lifestyle choices and
orientation cannot be recognised. The criminalization of homosexuality will not be the first
private issue that bothers morality. Sodomy and incest are also private, but they are already
criminalised in our criminal codes. We should also remember that polygamy, an intimate
private affair, is outlawed in almost every Western country.
11. To suggest that Ghana should focus on essential issues of road and corruption instead of
LGBTQ+ is the weakest of all the arguments. When the countries in Europe and America
debated and passed laws favouring LGBTQ+, was LGBTQ+ their most pressing and important
issue to their people? Poland and Hungary, countries in Europe, have passed legislation
against the activities of LGBTQ+. In less than two weeks ago, Spain has announced plans to
ban prostitution, a behaviour they legalised over 20 years ago. The possible socio-economic
effects of homosexuality on Ghana are as dire as corruption. If we recognise and tolerate such
societal moral decay, what will be our moral strength in fighting corruption? In any case,
promoting the anti-LGBTQ+ Bill does not stop any advocacy against corruption and all the
other things we consider important. Ghana has many problems we struggle to deal with, and
we will not add LGBTQ+ to it.
12. Is LGBTQ+ more important than racism and other fundamental human rights? Once again, the
attempt by Western countries to impose mental derailment and unguided choices and
orientations on us in the name of LGBTQ+ exposes their inherent hypocrisies. Is it not curious
how Europe and America cannot question the most stringent laws against LGBTQ+ in the
Arab and Gulf states but are quick to speak against Africa? The most significant foreign direct
investment and trade from Europe and America go to the Gulf countries. The countries that
commit the most human rights abuses globally are the owners of the biggest football clubs in
Europe. Why is Europe not rejecting the money and investments of these human rights
On 31st December 2020, a bill against racism was tabled at the United Nations General
Assembly. The Bill was called ‘‘A global call for concrete action for the elimination of racism,
racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive
implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action’’
Countries such as the USA, UK, Australia, Canada, Israel, France, Germany, Netherlands and
all the major European countries voted NO to the Bill. They were not interested in supporting
a bill aimed at stopping global racism, yet LGBTQ+ is their priority.
13. Nobody is born homosexual. There is no scientific proof that a person can be born gay, lesbian,
bisexual, queer etc. These are lifestyle choices, mental disorders and orientations, and if we
are to recognise any lifestyle choice and orientation and even mental disorders as human
rights without any legal limitation, how will society function?
14. The constant reference to Article 35 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana as a
shade of refuge for supporting the so-called rights of the LGBTQ+ community is deficient and
dead on arrival. When the Constitution was being drafted, if we had transgender people and
queers in the community, the Constitution would have proscribed such behaviour the same
way incest, paedophilia and sodomy have been criminalised. This constitutional provision
never envisaged homosexuality as a future right that will promote the dignity of any human
being by the stretch of any imagination.
15. Kojo Besia is not the same as homosexuality. It is often cited that homosexuals have always
been with us, and therefore LGBTQ+ is not foreign. This argument is feebly anaemic. Though
we do not deny the long existence of homosexual practice in Ghana, the act has always been
considered taboo and outlawed on legal, moral and social grounds. Besides, apart from the
lesbians and gays, all the other categories of LGBTQ+ are entirely foreign to Ghanaians. It is also not true that men who exhibit some female behavioural characteristics, commonly called Kojo Besia, are necessarily homosexuals. It is therefore erroneous to equate the concept of Kojo Besia nomenclature to homosexuality.
In conclusion, Ghanaians are determined to see the passage of the Bill on promoting proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values. We shall make it clear that European pets are pests in Africa. They cannot force their preferences on us. We want to encourage our Members of Parliament to be bold to defend the dignity and proper human sexual rights and Ghanaian family values by rejecting any form of western cultural imperialism through the anti-LGBTQ+ Bill.
God bless our homeland Ghana.
1. James McKeown (Finland)
Convener & Lead Advocate
2. Frederick Addo (France)
+33 6 70 07 13 10
3. Ebenezer Owusu-Afriyie (Finland)
+358 45 2266555
4. Richard Zinleri (South Korea)
|Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content. Please report any inappropriate content to us, and we will evaluate it as a matter of priority.|