In analytical philosophy, we learn to be very careful with the meanings of our terms-- both in choosing wisely, and paying attention and trying to rectify when we're using different meanings for the same words. What can see like a semantic quibble can actually bring people closer to understanding each other, and if not agreeing then at least discussing differences in a more effective way.

For instance... I believe the definition of spiritual that Seridano was using was something close to "Relating to the immaterial or the soul", while the definition of religious she was using was something close to "Relating to faith or devotion". Whereas "vox" seems to associate them both with "related to the supernatural".

And here's the thing-- I think Vox just isn't interested in discussing options other than Materialism, because that's what he believes in. I'm a Materialist too, but just saying that ends the conversation. Philosophy isn't only about talking about what you do or don't believe though, it's about examining it, under the light of logic and critical thinking. So let's do that.