Interesting (long) article in the NYT Magazine about homosexual behaviors in animals. I was glad that the article points out that we can't engage in the naturalistic fallacy ("If it's 'natural' -- animals do it, then it's morally okay.") It seems to me that there may not be a single simple explanation of why homosexual behavior would exist in animals, but it's possible that their gay relationships are much less "exclusive" and they're more likely to be bisexual. In that event, the gay sex could be evidence merely of a hyperactive sex drive, which would obviously be beneficial from a Darwinian standpoint.
I've written on this topic before, btw.
