Shock in Ghana’s Classrooms: Has the NDC Quietly Normalised LGBTQ After Campaigning Against It?
For years, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) presented itself to Ghanaians as the political party firmly opposed to LGBTQ ideology. On campaign platforms, radio discussions, town hall meetings, and community engagements, the message was consistent and unmistakable:
“The NPP is soft on LGBTQ. They refused to sign the Anti-Gay Bill. Vote NDC and we will protect Ghanaian values.”
This narrative resonated strongly with parents, religious leaders, and traditional authorities who viewed the issue not merely as a political debate, but as a matter of culture, morality, and national identity.
Today, however, serious questions are being raised.
Without public announcement, parliamentary debate, or national consultation, the Ministry of Education has approved a Physical Education and Health Teachers’ Manual whose content is now generating widespread concern across the country.
What the Approved Manual Says
In clear terms, the manual defines gender identity as:
A person’s deeply felt internal experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth.
It further states:
This concept goes beyond the binary notion of gender (male and female).
These statements have triggered strong reactions nationwide.
This language did not come from a civil society organization.
It was not introduced by a foreign donor or advocacy group.
It appears in an official document approved by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Ghana, intended to guide teachers in classrooms across the country.
Familiar Language, Legitimate Concerns
Observers have been quick to point out that phrases such as “sex assigned at birth,” “internal experience of gender,” and “beyond male and female” are widely used in international LGBTQ frameworks promoted by global institutions and Western education systems.
For years, these exact definitions were cited by politicians and commentators as evidence of foreign ideological influence. Their sudden appearance in a government-approved educational manual has therefore raised serious concerns and suspicions.
A Political Contradiction
The situation presents a striking political irony.
This is the same NDC that:
Accused the NPP of secretly backing LGBTQ interests
Used the Anti-Gay Bill as a major campaign tool
Promised to defend Ghanaian culture, family values, and moral standards
Yet under the NDC’s administration:
The Anti-Gay Bill remains unresolved
Parliament has offered no public clarification
Schools are now being issued materials that expand gender beyond the male–female binary
There has been no official press briefing from the Ministry of Education.
No detailed explanation.
No denial.
Only silence.
Questions That Demand Answers
The development raises critical questions that parents, teachers, religious leaders, and policymakers cannot ignore:
Who approved this content?
What vetting process was followed before approval?
Why was Parliament not informed or consulted?
Is this the beginning of broader curriculum changes?
Will these concepts be introduced at the JHS and SHS levels next?
No new law has been passed.
No bill has been debated.
Yet a significant ideological shift appears to have entered the education system quietly through a teachers’ manual designed to shape how young Ghanaians understand sex, gender, and identity.
Beyond Partisan Politics
This issue goes beyond party politics. It touches on transparency, accountability, and public trust.
Education policy shapes minds long before legislation shapes society. Introducing sensitive concepts through official materials without public engagement risks eroding confidence in government institutions and the education system itself.
Ghanaians are not asking for secrecy. They are asking for clarity and honesty.
The Question Ghana Must Confront
If the NDC genuinely opposes LGBTQ ideology as it pledged during the campaign, then fundamental questions remain unanswered:
Why does an official government textbook reject the male–female binary?
Why adopt definitions the party previously criticised?
Why introduce such content without national dialogue or parliamentary oversight?
Ghanaians deserve clear and direct answers not whispers, not silence, and not fine print buried in official manuals.
Because today, it is a teachers’ guide.
Tomorrow, it could be the entire curriculum.
And by then, it may be too late to pretend nobody saw it coming.