Pretty good. I think we're walking the line when using cartoony characters to represent our morals and worldviews because of the presuppositions (accurate or not) of cartoons and/or furry art.
Now these are not my assumptions, but the assumptions of many that may be the target audience of this comic. One being the cartoony comic formula that could be argued that it is targeted towards a younger audience. People are rabid about this kind of thing currently. Another being the furry aspect which many do not relate with or cannot relate with. Many will outright disregard this because of the furry aspect out of principle.
Again, this is not my opinion of the comic. I'm explaining how non-zoophiles may see this. Overall I think it argues the morals and views of zoophiles well enough.