I should be honest and say that I don't think I follow your argument very well. It sounds somewhat behaviorist to me at points - as if simply following certain practices is enough to establish that one is genuinely religious.  But I think I must be misreading you.

But however that may be, I am bothered by the notion of "substantial human needs" (or "human goods" in your definition). Clearly, many such needs/goods - such as some you mention - are quite concrete and practical in nature and not, presumably, the kind of thing religions are supposed to satisfy (though there is an island in the vicinity of New Guinea which once had a full-blown "cargo-cult").  If we exclude those things, however, and confine ourselves to satisfying what you term "metaphysical yearning", one problem I see there is that said yearnings might presumably be satisfied by systems of thought that are not religions (Hegelian thought might be one example - and perhaps even Marxism if believed sufficiently strongly).  Do you see a way around that?

DA