Dr Jeffrey Haynes, Professor Emeritus of Politics, London Metropolitan University, UK
By Prof. Jeffrey Haynes
Do we know what God thinks about same-sex relations and the desirability of a new, harsh law against the practice in Ghana? The ‘Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill’, currently before Parliament, seeks new, harsh penalties for those identifying as LGBTQ+ or for advocating for LGBTQ+ rights.
Ghana is fortunate to have many prominent religious leaders anxious to let everyone know what they believe God thinks about this issue. They are not afraid to voice those opinions publicly, and so we may consider what their views are, which uniformly profess to reflect God’s view on the controversial topic.
Religious advocacy for a new LGBTQ+ law
Ghana’s Muslims comprise an estimated six million people, 20% of the population. Ghana’s National Chief Imam, Sheikh Osmanu Nuhu Sharubutu, through his spokesperson Sheikh Aremeyaw Shaibu, maintains a strong position in favour of a new anti-LGBTQ+ law. The Chief Imam views the legislation as a necessary safeguard for Ghanaian cultural and Islamic values, which he considers to be under threat. The office of the Chief Imam has described LGBTQ+ practices as abominable and against the teachings of the Quran.
The Anglican Church of Ghana (Province of West Africa), with an estimated membership exceeding 1 million, has indicated that while the church opposes the practice, they do not endorse extreme violence or human rights abuses against LGBTQ+ individuals.
The Roman Catholic church is one of Ghana’s largest churches, with around three million members. Pope Leo XIV (elected May 2025) has not explicitly supported anti-LGBTQ laws in Ghana or in Africa more widely. While Vatican doctrine officials indicate same-sex blessings (Fiducia Supplicans) remain, Leo emphasises that ‘homosexual lifestyle’ is at ‘odds with the gospel’. In Ghana, Roman Catholic bishop, Matthew Kwasi Gyamfi recently criticised President Mahama over his stance on the LGBTQ bill, warning that it risks undermining the will of Ghanaians. Bishop Gyamfi stated that the president’s position that the issue is not a priority sends the wrong signal.
Finally, prominent prophets have frequently commented on LGBTQ+ issues, with many vocally opposing it. Key figures, including Prophets Kofi Oduro and Nigel Gaisie have condemned LGBTQ+ activities as un-scriptural, un-Ghanaian, and under divine judgment, advocating for a new, strict anti-LGBTQ+ law.
Religion versus democracy?
It is clear Ghana’s religious leaders object to LGBTQ+ rights based on both religious and cultural grounds, often framing the issue as an intersection of ‘unbiblical’ acts and ‘un-Ghanaian’ societal norms. Leading Christian and Muslim groups argue that homosexuality violates biblical teachings, Islamic doctrines, and traditional societal values, and claim there is popular support for a new, strict anti-LGBTQ+ law.
Religious leaders don’t rely only on religious arguments to encourage the progress of a new law. What we see is a mixture of both religious and secular arguments. On the one hand, homosexuality is seen as against God’s will, as reflected in the Bible and the Quran. On the other hand, religious leaders also use secular and cultural arguments to make their case for a new law. This would appear to acknowledge that in Ghana, political decision making is formally the domain of secular politicians not religious leaders. Put another way, Ghana is not a theocracy and secular law makers make the important decisions.
It may be that religious leaders do not believe that religious arguments on their own are sufficient to persuade parliamentarians and the president of Ghana, a secular democracy, that a new law should be one of the current government’s main priorities at a time of pronounced socio-economic problems.
The way forward
How to deal with what is rapidly developing into an impasse? On the one hand, religious leaders are strongly in favour of a new law as an immediate priority. On the other hand, the supreme secular power holder, the president, who has the singular ability to make the law happen or not, does not agree.
Bishop Gyamfi claims that not pursuing a new law as a top priority undermines the will of Ghanaians. But how does he know what the will of Ghanaians is on this issue? Presumably he is referring to the fact that in the last parliament, the people’s representatives, members of parliament, voted unanimously for a new law. Yet, a 2024 opinion poll from GlobalAnalytics, which I discussed in a recent Graphic article (‘Is a new LGBTQ+ law a priority for Ghanaians?’, 11 April 2026), does not indicate that a new law is a popular priority.
How do democracies resolve an impasse? Democracies resolve human rights controversies through a structured, multi-layered approach that prioritises the rule of law, institutional checks and balances and open public debate. These are systems designed to manage conflict without violence, allowing for the peaceful negotiation of competing rights and interests. Is it too much to hope that such a process can be followed in Ghana to try to resolve the issue?
The writer, Dr Jeffrey Haynes, is a Professor Emeritus of Politics, London Metropolitan University, UK.
About The Author
