Did everyone miss the really important part of the article in which it was explained WHY homosexual acts may be more prevalent with some groups, specifically herding groups? In any group that has a complex hierarchy same gendered male sex can provide bonding without the threat of competition. I find this sociologically interesting but still irrelevant to human sexual orientation. Exposure to mercury can lower testosterone levels in birds and cause a much higher incidence of same sex bonding. Prior to the 1800s the concept of a sexual orientation did not exist. (And therefore is a little hard for God to condemn 2000-6000 years before the invention of the idea) Why should we assume that such a rigid social construct effectively describes animal behavior? All this article really proves is that sexually stimulating acts are used by animals for purposes other than procreation, and that they are important to the basic social order.

For those trying to relate incest to homosexuality for some odd reason, anthropologists believe the most likely reason for the strong taboo against incest stems from the inherent confusion in social structure, not purely biological reasons.

People also seem to comment saying that seeing people express their homosexuality in public makes them nauseous because they see it as abnormal, but in the same sentence are warning people against teaching our children that such expressions of affection are normal. Our perceptions of normality are taught to us.

And the only person qualified to quote Leviticus at me is someone who hasn't ever shaved their beard, gotten a tattoo or worn clothing made of mixed fabrics.

To sum: Homosexuality in animals seems largely to be a byproduct of social order, not natural instinct. This doesn't help any argument unless you can effectively teach a group of animals to understand the social constructs of orientation and then communicate their preferences. Equating homosexuality to incest, cannibalism, or other taboo subjects is weird and also counter productive because they are generally just deeply ingrained social constructs anyway. What you think is normal does not equal what is right and wrong. And if you quote Scripture at me you're probably a giant fucking hypocrite.