You need to be pretty inclusive and liberal to include them in the category 'Satanist'. They are for things like enforced equality(read - affirmitive blacktion type ****), social justice(read:hipster bull****), being accepted by the normals though shining up their collective good guy badges, and the general castration and pussification of Satan himself. Most wiccans are more hard core than these guys.
I generally don't find it my, or anyone's place, to define what a "true" Satanist is. That game has been played for decades and it is mostly posturing IMO. I couldn't call out the Church of Satan for this kind of thing and then turn around and do it myself. Simply a Satanist is anyone with a favorable view of Satan. Now, that doesn't mean they are intelligent or right about anything. There are plenty of idiots and Satanism isn't immune. There are a lot of groups I wish I could say are not "real" Satanists by some qualifier. But it all comes down to a "No True Scotsman" fallacy in the end.
As far as Wiccans I can say that in my experience that the few I knew... intimately... they were more as crazy than hardcore. But I would agree that crazy is preferable to hipster "normalization" or whatever we want to refer to it as. But I'm not totally convinced that that is their actual intention, given what I've read about the formation of the group and what some of the higher ranking members have said. I would be willing to consider that that is perhaps partially what it has become, but I have not seen any evidence of that. After all, a little bit of trolling is kind of in the testing spirit of Satan. Perhaps it could be measured by how far they take
Overall I agree with at least their explanation of religion needing to not be supernatural, as well as some of their tenets and politics. All that could really convince me that the group isn't serious is if their more prominent members didn't have the education and magical aptitude to back it up. I know nothing of the latter and what little I've read on the former I at least saw parallels with my own thoughts and I know I'm relatively well read up on Satanic literature or at the very least familiar with the various takes on Satanism.
To your path it might be essential, but not to mine, or to Satanism in general.
Your mythological reasoning strengthens me in my opinion that moral, humanist Satanists should call themselves Luciferians.
Thinking about it, I think you have a point. However I would say that to even have that Luciferian label you *have* to take on the Satanic aspect. Without Satan there is no Lucifer, unless you want to go to an interpretation before their conflation. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the "Morning Star" and "Light bearers" in that kind of pre-Satan interpretation is strongly associated with Christ and Christianity. Specifically the Order of the Eastern Star comes to mind. Actually I know of at least one local lodge and I've had family who were members. As a third option, you can go quasi-gnostic. Some believe that "Lucifer" was a Roman god but then why not use a more percise name for him then?
They don't seem to really be any of those, and so Lucifer in this case would basically be Satan. Luciferian might be a better label, but that wouldn't stop them from qualifying as Satanists given the literature from where they draw their own mythology (Milton ect).
. The public image of Satanism will always be wrong, I suppose, but I'd prefer to be wrongly considered harmless than the contrary.
Ya, I'm not too much into having to worry about my safety or loosing a job ect. Some people get a thrill out of feeling like they got this super taboo secret and are something that is hated and loathed. I think that's a pretty unhealthy way to live for any long period of time. Unless of course you totally don't care, which is kind of the point isn't it? So it shouldn't matter on a personal level if you are hated or seen as harmless, but only the former confers practical real world risks that can distract from your practice and so I think being viewed as harmless is generally preferable. Conversely, being feared can have it's advantages in certain situations. But generally speaking it doesn't in my experience since the attention and ire isn't worth whatever you used the fear to accomplish.
