I'm sorry, but this is unfounded. You can't dismiss an entire religion on the grounds that you say they understand it a certain way. I have, for instance, already offered at least one former Scientologist who never believed the stories and never believed in Hubbard, yet maintained belief in Scientology itself. You can't just state no such person exists as a justification for your argument, at least in any seriousness.
If I say that I believe in Christianity, yet also maintain that the Gospels have no spiritual value, is my initial claim true or false? Obviously, it is false.
Similarly, regardless of Burroughs' claim, if he outright rejected the teachings of Scientology then he could not have believed in Scientology. I have no doubt that the man saw some value in Scientology, but to say he believed in Scientology while also rejecting essential Scientology beliefs is nonsensical. This comes to down what Scientology itself is: and if Mr. Burroughs did not believe that human bodies are inhabited by alien spirits and so forth, no matter what value he may find in some of the notions of the cult, Mr. Burroughs did not believe in Scientology.
Okay, that's at least debatable. Let's say, for instance, I take Scientology as a method: I adhere to it because I think it provides the right way to live, and take all of the sci-fi elements as nothing more than allegory, metaphor and inspiring illustration. This seems as reasonable a Scientologist to me as a Christian who doesn't believe the Bible is literally true. Where's the crucial difference?
The differences is that when you do such a thing with Scientology you are no longer practicing Scientology. Scientology was invented by L. Ron Hubbard, and his teachings regarding Scientology are the gold standard. Any deviation from them, especially one as significant as reinterpreting his stories as allegory, is no longer Scientology, but instead a practice loosely based on Scientology. Just as we do not say that Buddhism is Hinduism, such an alteration of Scientology would not be Scientology.
Had Hubbard wrote the stories and presented them as allegory, perhaps you could pull this off. However, he did no such thing.
Hmmm. Should have said some teachings. That said, I've never seen a Scientologist on the street waving a banner proclaiming that South Africans will be left behind when the mothership comes. I have seen Christians on the street holding banners proclaiming that all fags are going to hell. And like I said, it's a matter of personal belief... I don't imagine any Scientologists are in any danger of winning the coveted 'Most bigoted believer' award any time soon, do you?
No, Scientology is an openly, blatantly racist ideology. Whether or not you have personally experienced overt examples of racism from Scientologists is completely irrelevant, as is your experience of open Christian hatred. There are, after all, far more Christians than Scientologists.
Whether or not a Scientologists would win some hypothetical award is completely irrelevant: racism is core to Scientology doctrine.