How should this be viewed?
Well the only logical conclusion is that these two gay penguins had sex together, made a baby, and then incubated it, from which it follows soundly that sodomy is a perfectly natural and virtuous activity for human persons to engage in.
That's sarcasm, of course. 1) As Lad said, no indication they attempted to mate. 2) Had they, they would not have produced a baby. 3) It seems more or less insignificant, sexually speaking, that they are incubating it. 4) It's totally disingenuous that penguins, who are monogamous
, are now being propped up as a model for human sexual behavior because someone thinks there's a gay angle to be had.
That being said, there is sodomy in the animal world. Here is a great article on it by Dr. Solimeo: http://www.tfp.org/the-qanimal-homosexualityq-myth/
In sum, when animals sodomize each other it is typically the result of conflicting stimuli, and environmental factors favoring copulation. In other words, animals usually sodomize each other for the same reason that they eat their own feces or even their young. They are presented with conflicting stimuli and since they cannot reason to select the appropriate response, they simply act on whichever stimuli is more favorable given the situation. Sometimes that means they eat their babies, their feces, or commit sodomy.
But even setting that aside, it is a completely unwarranted logical leap to go from "two animals sodomized each other" to "sodomy is a usual, natural, and virtuous activity for human persons to engage in." There's no reason to believe that aside from whatever very vague appeal to Darwinism is implied in the argument. And see above, too. We're encouraged to be sodomites
like penguins, but not monogamous like them. The agenda couldn't be more transparent.