only explaining what NARTH claims no it provides a soft endorsement Wikipedia is for the benefit of readers not for the progaganda interests of orgs The claim that all SSA treated by the org is unwanted is a WP REDFLAG claim See MOS QUOTE it is always wrong to use phrases like The site is considered sacred by the religion s scriptures because it interpolates an opinion also WP ATTRIBUTEPOV no reason the lead shouldn t explain what NARTH s claims are WP FRINGE and WP REDFLAG applies if they are wrong they need analysis in the body not presentation as soft endorsement in the lead