That is true but is that a point? My point was that people can react badly and I gave my example. The outcome was bad. What does 3e putting them back in matter when it comes to the point I made?
In part because it shows a societal shift in tolerance of portrayals of evil.
And it also was a time that seriously was TSR trying a lot of bad ideas to expand the market... Well, more correctly, most weren't bad, but just weren't "good enough." 7 active setting lines across 2 games (AD&D 2 and D&D BECMI), 3 more games with 1 setting each (SF, GW, MSH/AMSH), and then Amazing Engine...
Plus, the bulk of the satanic panic was over by 1984... the renaming was (quite rightly) lampooned on various local BBSs and even some fidonet and usenet feeds as pure cosmetics and more than 5 years too late to matter.
That being said, certain fringe religious figures still rant against all RPGs (and board games, card games, comic books, novels, and so on) as "[...] the work of the Devil." (Jerry Prevo, 2012, stumping on TV for his next book burning.) And Prevo was, according to a friend who listened to his TV show, well aware the rename was a dodge, not a true removal of the objectionable content.
John Weddleton, owner of Bosco's Comics, retorted on the news to the effect that all the burned books meant more sales for him, since most of the kids would simply rebuy the books. Not quite a record quarter for the store, but John did confirm in conversation at the store that, indeed, D&D and Rifts sales picked up for the entire month after the bonfire...
That the news (all 3 local channels) presented Dr Prevo (I'm unwilling to give his website any additional hit to check the postnomials for exactly what doctoral degree he holds) in a quite unkind light shows the difference from when he was stumping in the late 70's... when their coverage was sympathetic.
So, yes,
that 3E switched back to Demons and Devils is a significant evidence of change in public perception.