Stole $1000 (likely from someone who wouldn't realise it's even gone) to prevent untold trauma. I understand it's a grey situation but knowing how damaging conversion therapy can be to a person, I'd say theft is certainly the lesser of two evils.

These are the possible choices:

1.) He should've said nothing as he wasn't willing to do the conversion therapy and therefore quite possibly let the kid go to a real conversion therapy "camp" of which usually inflict lasting harm.

2.) Actually have done the conversion therapy as asked.

3.) Lie as described in the OP

You said "good for the kid" indicating that you think that conversion therapy is a bad thing but also somehow came to the conclusion that 3. is the least moral choice? What? Baffling.

There are no government standard conversion therapy treatments.

Staying in the closet is the intended outcome and they received that service.

Stealing from bigots isn't the moral evil you seem to think it is.

Imo option 3 is basically what he did - keeping $700 means he basically took $35/hour as a babysitting fee. Not sure what’s standard for babysitting rates (child free for life), but I sure as shit wouldn’t take responsibility for a child for that much lol. The amount aside, rather than theft I see the situation as him inflating the value of the service he was providing - still a shitty thing to do in other circumstances, but one we collectively accept as not illegal theft when it’s by brand names and “luxury” stuff.
In other circumstances I’d fully agree with your point that the kid’s in a morally ambiguous situation with money he knows was ~~stolen~~ scammed from his parents, but from both the kids perspectives at the time thinking anon really was gay, he was in a vulnerable position with a very real chance of being cut off by his parents and needing to support himself. That removes any ambiguity imo, even ignoring the fact that his parents are bigots who more than deserved what they got

"Real" conversion therapy likely would have been damaging and more expensive. Also, that cash may have given anon some leverage to do things without his parents knowing, also a good thing in the situation described.

A bit of a scam, sure, but it's not like "real" conversion therapy isn't, while also inflicting trauma on the recipients.

Let's recontextualize this - my neighbor wants to spend $5k to remove a safety feature from their car, because they saw a dumb tick tock. Let's say it's ABS breaking, they're just absolutely convinced it's bad

Now I hear about this, and I don't want their stupidity to kill their whole family. I offer to do it for $1k, and instead I actually change their brakes.

Is this ethical? In the end, I didn't honor the words of our agreement, because it was very stupid. It would've been unethical, likely illegal, to do what they asked

I did save them money and prevent them from finding someone who would've done what they asked. I also did work on their car, just not what they thought I did. They're happy with the result, and no longer seeking to remove a system they don't understand

It depends on your ethical framework, but it seems like a stretch to call this theft. The guy in the post provided babysitting and mentorship, which is part of the agreed services. They would probably not have paid so much for what they actually got, but a certain amount of markup is needed to sell the ruse

Probably almost definitely overall a wholesome story.

I think the kids morally ambiguous situation was better than the situation their parents were putting them in so it's a net win.

I don't see this as stealing, as conversation therapy is a fraudulent and cruel practice in the first place. Bro actually did a form of conversion therapy in a safe and mentally supportive environment. Granted the "conversion" part may have been inadvertent, but he did help someone deal with a potentially traumatizing situation and saved him from harm. Which gave OP the time and space to really look at himself and discover who he truly is. I think that's worth the $1K that would've gone toward a far more evil practice.

Conversion therapy isn't real though; you can't make someone not be gay. From the parent's perspective, their problem is likely that they think they have a religious obligation to not accept homosexuality (perhaps their place in their community depends on this), but also want a relationship with their son, and don't want to have to choose between these. So probably what they really want is for their son to go back in the closet in a way that is plausible, and the service they are paying for offers that plausibility and creates the greatest possible chance of it happening (being nice to anon and letting him know he has an undo button without feeding him bullshit or being pushy).

So on second thought, maybe it's not unambiguously wholesome, because it is lies and could be enabling a homophobic culture. But on the other hand it's probably for the best that this sort of conflict be put off until anon is no longer a teenager who is totally dependent on their parents. Whether the money was earned honestly I think is less of a big deal here ethically, it's basically in the same category as paying for a consultation with a psychic, the sort of thing where they are all but explicitly paying for the fiction.