Depends where you put the boundaries on things like 'religion' and 'priestly order'. I've heard arguments that football can be considered a religion by most definitions, but the fact is that it just isn't. It's so blurry with things like this that you can fit all the categories and still not really be a priestly order.

I'd also point out that the 'seminal texts' you speak of aren't given authority or considered to be unquestionable/inspired by anything greater than the authors themselves, which is a huge distinction that needs to be made.

Can there be atheistic cults? Yes.

Is atheism is a cult? No.

As an atheist I don't really like Richard Dawkins, especially after he made some misogynistic remarks about some girl the article of which is here [link]

I like scientists. people who are forwarding progress by actually doing things instead of pissing creationists off. Teachers, who instead of instigating creationists actually teach evolution in a non-sarcastic way.

As an atheist I don't understand why we need a movement when science was doing that quite well for centuries XD

The New Atheists have their rituals.
Hmm, that's a new one for me.

The New Atheists have a hierarchy
Lolwut, incorrect.

The New Atheists have their seminal texts.
Never heard of any.

If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Wrong. If Chuck Norris says it's a cow, then it's a cow.

some atheists groups do act like a religion but whats wrong with that? Yeah its a little weird to me but if its what they wanna do nothing wrong with that

Not sure I'm following you.

Guy standing at a podium talking = pastor
Is the President a pastor?

Rituals
What rituals?

Hierarchy
There are those who are famous for their opinions on religion, but there's no chain-of-command amongst atheism. And even if there was a hierarchy, not all of them pertain to religion.

Text
There is nothing holy about each book. They're only books that contain either opinions or demonstrable facts. If I burn a stack of Qu'rans, someone might want to put a fatwa out on me. If I burn a pile of collected Hitchens, Dawkins, or Sagan's books, nothing of the sort will happen. There are no guidelines on how to handle such books, whereas my grandmother taught me growing up that it was profane to put anything on top of a Bible.

Okay I dont get it....I never heard of "New Atheists" and didnt they just dont believe in a god?......so its not like a religion, having "rules" and all, right? ....

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "rituals," and when you say "hierarchy," I think your just mistaking credibility and respect for it. I think Richard Dawkins is a very intelligent, well spoken, and rational man, but he's not the boss of me. His word is not a holy dictum. Anyone can disagree with him. It's best you have a sound, logical reason to disagree, though, since he used logic to reach his own conclusions. He shares them at length, too. The same goes for what you mistakenly call "seminal texts." Works like The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins and God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens are just their opinions of and arguments against religion and the reasoning behind them, presented at length. You don't have to agree with everything in them, or even to have read them, to be an atheist. They certainly aren't the origin of atheism, either, as poor old Socrates demonstrated for us.

Now, even if you were to disregard all of the above, how do rituals, hierarchy, texts, and outspoken advocates constitute a religion? Religion does not own these things. I'm certain you could find the same for any number of other organizations, like a company, or a military unit, or a political party or special interest group, e.g. the U.S. Marine Corps, the Freemasons, the Ku Klux Klan, the Republican and Democratic Parties, and so forth.

is 'off' a TV channel. I can stare at it. it involves my TV.

You have made a converse error in logic.

I have a picture for you: [link]

Is it a duck?