So, to an extent, the emergent 'Western Buddhism' that we are participating in today has developed alongside the modern notion of 'spirituality'. There is arguably some degree of inter-involvement in the development of 'spirituality' (albeit a very slippery and ambiguous one) and contemporary Buddhist formations, both having to negotiate the cultural influence of modern psychology--their inter-involvement set the conditions for the spiritual explorations of the counter cultural 1950s and 1960s, the New Age movement, and more broadly, the MInd, Body, Soul or Self-help genre. All these developments are shaped by the political and economic imperatives of the day, namely, capitalism, or since the 1980s, neoliberal capitalism.
What I'm trying to illustrate with this very schematic historical overview, is how 'spirituality' always takes shape against the backdrop of historical struggles for power and cultural legitimacy. So, to link this to the comments by the article in the OP, it is not entirely invalid or unreasonable to suggest that some contemporary forms of spirituality may reflect a 'copping out' insofar as 'the spiritual' has today been appropriated--rebranded--by capitalist imperatives. Yet, there is no essential unity to or historical necessity for such approaches to spirituality. In light of how 'the spiritual' has historically been a site for political struggle and social change, and given that in our so-called secular age most people are no longer willing to allow morality to be determined by religious or authoritative political systems, I would personally not be too quick to dismiss those who choose to pursue a 'spiritual' life, for spirituality (broadly conceived as the ways in which a person work on the self to guide and transfigure their style of conduct) could offer the means to cultivate what Goenka and the Dalai Lama call, an art of living.
Of course like many here, I am skeptical and wary of the 'lifestyles' promoted under the brand of 'spirituality'. But given how broad 'spirituality' is—given that the ethical and political implications of 'the spiritual' are contingent upon the historical environment and are always subject to change—I don't think the criticism of 'cop out' ought to be generalised to all who choose to pursue a 'spiritual life'. Paul Heelas, a noted sociologist of religion in the UK who had previously written several influential books on the individualistic and capitalist impulse of the New Age movement, recently published a book which presents ethnographic research to suggest that there are communities in the UK who are engaging with spirituality, even if it entails New Age or self-help ideas, to cultivate an ethic of life, an ethos of care and engagement to cultivate greater ethical-sensitivity and responsibility towards the challenges facing their personal lives, society and the contemporary world. I don't think it'd be fair to call this a 'cop out'.