Senior investigative journalist, Manasseh Azure Awuni, has asked Gabby Otchere-Darko, a leading member of the incumbent New Patriotic Party, why the Western World aren’t sanctioning Arab countries against the LGBTQ+ agenda.
Few days after some eight legislators placed a bill before parliament with the aim of wiping out LGBTQ+ agenda in the country, Mr Otchere-Darko said the move will cause Ghana to be sanctioned and blacklisted internationally.
Meanwhile, taking to Facebook in a long note, Mr Awuni has disagreed with the politician and asked why the Western World doesn’t carry the LGBTQ+ agenda to the Arab countries.
The journalist had series of questions to register his assertions below:
To Gabby Asare Otchere-Darko and those talking about Western sanctions and blacklisting should Ghana go ahead with the anti-LGBTQ+ bill, I want to ask this question: Why has the West not sanctioned or blacklisted Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Arab World?
Are there no gays and lesbians in Saudi Arabia and the Arab world? Or do they discriminate in the application of their principles? As we question our own actions, shouldn’t we also question the inconsistencies of the West?
Why should some powerful nations tie aid to LGBTQ+ rights instead of other important issues of governance such as corruption? Or is sexuality more important to them than the poverty and famine that are caused by the leaders, whose devious actions they know very well?
The rights to quality education, healthcare and quality life are almost beyond the reach of the average Ghanaian or African, and the reason is well-documented. Why aren’t we seeing sanctions for the numerous human rights abuses that have become a norm in the continent?
I have issues with the current bill, especially the attempt to criminalise advocacy and all discussion about LGBTQ+.
But if we flip the coin on the important things that should engage the attention of our leaders, we should equally be worried about the ‘important things’ that should engage the attention of the powerful nations.
It’s difficult to properly engage in this debate because of the inconsistencies and selective application of principles and morality on both sides of the debate.