Be as intolerant as you like.
Celebrities have no more or less responsibility for the cult than do other 'public' members of the church. Most scientologists 'promote' scientology. They do so because, at least for a time, they have found something about the subject which has helped them and which they wish to share with their friends and family. That is not an inherent 'evil action'.
Celebrities aren't staff. They aren't typically all that aware of the gross inconsistencies between church management's promises versus their actual practices.
I see no reasonable justification for self-righteous indignation over the continuing allegiance of any scientologist who is not himself directly responsible for enacting, enabling, or supporting the abuses of the church.
Travolta isn't. He isn't Sea Org. He's not even staff. He's not 'guilty'. He's just a famous guy who as a member of the church is accorded special treatment by church management out of its own cynical attempts at church-promotion.
Individuals are responsible for their own actions. Most of the celebrity scientologists are not themselves responsible for the abuses of the church. Worth a moments consideration though is how many
ordinary scientologists, both staff & public,
have been active contributors to the abusive practices of the church. Many of these individuals have since left the church, e.g. Marty Rathbun. Many haven't, e.g. John Alexander.
Be 'out' doesn't magically make personal responsibility for past actions
disappear, anymore than being in 'good standing' or promoting the subject of scientology automatically makes a person responsible for the horrors of the rpf.
Mark A. Baker