Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Maverick Moment of the Day | Clinton's Name to be Placed in... »

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Super Sacred Sanctity of Marriage Watch

posted by on August 14 at 9:15 AM

Well, at least the swinging couple in Des Moines who opened their home to what sounds like some pretty raucous sex parties—fifteen mattresses, bondage crosses, sex swings, a mobile dungeon parked in the driveway—are being persecuted by their neighbors, city officials, and, judging from the photo in today’s Seattle Times, carbs. There’s comfort in all of that, I suppose. But I have a bone—heh, a bone—to pick with the Super Friends of the Super Sacred Institution of Marriage, Local Chapter (Archbishop Brunett, Rev. Hutcherson, Dino Rossi, John Carlson, the Washington State Supreme Court, et al).

Where is the outrage, gang?

I’m reading this story—which includes a picture that provides readers with a glimpse of hairy manass (look to the right and down)—and it’s the usual collapse-of-western-civilization stuff. Regan “Draco” Lane-Smith and “Naughty” Nonah Elliston are running a sex club in the suburbs, blah blah blah, and the neighbors are upset, blah blah blah, and—ZOMFG!—think of the children! (For the record: I wouldn’t want to live next door to a straight swinger’s club, or have to explain to my kid what goes on in one.) But it isn’t until paragraph nine—nine!—that we learn something that should concern the Super Friends of the Super Sacred Institution of Marriage.

Elliston, 40, and Lane-Smith, 39, met at a swingers party in Puyallup seven years ago and married three years later….

A few years into their marriage, they decided to find a house that would perfectly suit them and their hobby. They spent six months searching. They wanted to be clear of schools and churches.

Again, where’s the outrage? Marriage is, according to the Super Friends of the Super Sacred Institution of Marriage, all about children. Gay people, the SFSSIM argue, should not be allowed to marry because we don’t have children. (Except when we, you know, do.) And marriage, according to the SFSSIM, is all about monogamy, which gay men aren’t very good at.

Well, Elliston and Lane-Smith are childless and they’re clearly not monogamous—and they’re married! Legally married! Surely this legally married couple, willfully childless and cheerfully non-monogamous, represent a greater threat to the Super Sacred Sanctity of Marriage than gay couples do. For crying out loud, SFSSIM, Elliston and Lane-Smith recruit. They advertise! They encourage other straight married couples to adopt their non-monogamous lifestyle, to come to their parties, to ride on their sex swings and swim naked in their pool.

Where’s the organized movement to strip people like this—a real and present threat to the super sacred sanctity of marriage—of their right to marry?

Hello? Super Friends?

RSS icon Comments


When I read that article all I could think about was how great it is to have a swingers club like that so close to home in Illinois. Then I realized there is a Des Moines, WA and my dreams were shattered.

Posted by Fly-Over Illinois | August 14, 2008 9:15 AM

Dan, there's no outrage because this is a sex club for full figured people. The straight-only marriage people only care about the culturally hot people. Big girls don't count

Posted by Fly-Over Illinois | August 14, 2008 9:18 AM


Posted by Mr. Poe | August 14, 2008 9:19 AM

Who is being harmed here?

Posted by Bellevue Ave | August 14, 2008 9:23 AM

lol fat people

Posted by Non | August 14, 2008 9:24 AM

Silly Dan! As I'm sure the SFSSIM would be the first to tell you (or maybe third or fifth - hey, they're busy!), straight, married, childless, polyamorous, overweight folks aren't a threat to the Sanctity Of Marriage (tm), 'cause you know - they're STRAIGHT!

It is only homosexual, childless, monogamous, unmarried couples of any size that are a threat to the SOM(tm), because, well, because they're GAY! And The Great, Good, All-Seeing, All-Knowing Sky Grandpa (tm) says, "teh GAYS are BAD!", ergo gay marriage is also bad. The end.

What part of this don't you understand?

Posted by COMTE | August 14, 2008 9:29 AM


Actually, according to the GGASAKSG(tm), it doesn't matter if the homosexuals have children or not; they're still BAD!

Posted by COMTE | August 14, 2008 9:31 AM

A modest proposal: anyone can get married to anyone - for two years. After that if they have no children the marriage is dissolved. If marriage really were for the sake of families, then we could easily legislate it as such. You would get a temporary marriage for two years and it would become permanent when you could verify you had given birth to or adopted a child.

Posted by kinaidos | August 14, 2008 9:55 AM

Expecting any kind of consistency from people who take the bible as infallible is a joke. Remember, being gay is just as bad as eating shellfish as is mixing textiles to the ancient Hebrews. Where are the protests for poly-cotton blends and Ivar's?

Posted by Enigma | August 14, 2008 10:12 AM

The Super Friends are not interested in sexual shenanigans unless there is serious, hot, sweaty, Man-on-Man action going on.

And really, if you think about it, why would ANYONE be interested in sexual shenanigans that didn't involve hot, sweaty, Man-on-Man action?

Posted by Providence | August 14, 2008 10:18 AM

Don't tell them, but bi and homosexual people are known to frequent and play at the Cabin. *gasp*

Posted by friend of hwc | August 14, 2008 10:29 AM

does the article even mention the fact that there are OTHER sex camps in the area? Like the Bunkhouse place out past Redmond?

Posted by michael strangeways | August 14, 2008 10:37 AM

"Once in a while it sounds like a raccoon dying". Oh you poor neighbor. Hilarious!

Posted by scratkriby | August 14, 2008 10:40 AM

@4 The furniture, presumably.

Posted by pragmatic | August 14, 2008 10:44 AM

It's so hip and cutting edge to believe that all fat people are ugly and that all skinny people are beautiful.

Which is why it's surprising that the main publicity photos for some skinny people can be washed-out, photoshopped nightmares that you couldn't use to pick them out of a police line-up.

If they're skinny and beautiful, why would they need to do that?

Posted by whatevernevermind | August 14, 2008 10:47 AM

YFTM that there's no fucking reason why such a story would make it on the front page with headline above the fold.

Hint to failing newspapers: Chasing the Enquirer isn't working, is it?

Posted by K | August 14, 2008 10:50 AM

Holy christmas, those fuckers are huge! Not that that is a bad thing, of course.

Posted by Mike in MO | August 14, 2008 10:53 AM

"ZOMFG" is dan's new favorite word.

Posted by mnm | August 14, 2008 11:03 AM
Many nights, Rosenstiel said, he left his TV on as he went to sleep to block out moaning and slapping noises.

"Once in a while it sounds like a raccoon dying," Rosenstiel said.

OK, he's got a point. They're too loud. Hundreds of cigarette butts in your yard? Been there, called the police myself. But it's a funny story.
Posted by Fnarf | August 14, 2008 11:15 AM

I've always wondered, what does the "Z" mean in "ZOMFG"?

Posted by Mike in MO | August 14, 2008 12:03 PM

I like this:

"We're normal people who happen to enjoy sex," Elliston said.

Subtext: "Normal" people don't enjoy sex. Man, I feel sorry for normal people!

Posted by Sarah | August 14, 2008 12:12 PM

gaYs inspired thees peaples aktions.

Posted by Rueben McShitkicker | August 14, 2008 12:13 PM

Hey remember that post Dan put up about the fat woman who rolled over in her sleep onto a baby and killed it. Gawd-I'm still laughing. Someone mentioned how horrible it must be for that women to have killed that child. Dan of course has the right attitude about the incident. Who gives a fuck about that woman and kid. We sloggers have been amused-now let's move on to the next big thing.

Posted by Poe Fnarf | August 14, 2008 12:45 PM

@4 The people around them who thought they had moved into a residential community. We have zoning laws for a reason and I know I would pissed as fuck if my neighbor started running a business attracting upwards of 60 people to the neighborhood regardless of what they were doing.

Posted by Giffy | August 14, 2008 12:58 PM


We'd rather not moderate your comments, but off-topic, gratuitously inflammatory, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate remarks may be removed, and repeat offenders may be banned from commenting. We never censor comments based on ideology. Thanks to all who add to the conversation on Slog.

Posted by Pit Bull Dan | August 14, 2008 1:40 PM

I totally agree with 24. After living in the UD for 4 years having neighbors who host large parties multiple nights a week is terrible. Even if it's kept inside, which big parties never are, that many people will be pretty loud.

I totally feel bad for the neighbor who has to pick up their used condoms, that's just gross.

Posted by Little Red Ryan Hood | August 14, 2008 1:42 PM

Hey, Dan, maybe the better question to ask is why the media didn't get a quote from the SFSSIM about this story since every time they write about "gay" marriage, there's a quote from one of those motherf*&%ers...

Posted by Mickymse | August 14, 2008 1:50 PM

I am a very, very close neighbor to the Hardwood Cabin. I dont agree or participate with their lifestyle, and I personally agree that anyone who wants to be married should be. Nonah and Regan are wonderful neighbors. The property isnt a regular residential community. The houses are set up so far from the street you cant see them, and are surrounded by trees. The yards are larger then a football field. Parking? There is easily enough parking for over 75 cars on the property, so having 60 party goers is nothing. The groundskeeper quoted in the article, isnt the groundskeeper, he lives in a barn further up on the property with a band of yippee little dogs. Raccoons screaming? It may may be chihuahuas he is hearing. So there is an occasional black negligee hanging from a tree ... celebrate the differences, dont discrimate.

Posted by Muffy Nordstrom | August 14, 2008 1:58 PM

I don't believe for one minute that the sex is only indoors. Please. Frankly if you've got 60 biggins hit n it even's going to create quite a lot of noise not to mention seismic activity.

Posted by ewwww | August 14, 2008 2:08 PM

I know Regan and Nonah from other size-positive events, and remember their lengthy search for an appropriate place to have parties that would not infringe on neighbors' rights to quiet and privacy. They are good people, and are having fun in a responsible way with their friends. There's no pimping, no forced sex, no harm to anyone. The idea of the city shutting them down for zoning/business license issues is crazy. It's about NIMBY sex-phobes (and fat-phobes) pushing their agendas.

Posted by goddess.girl | August 14, 2008 2:43 PM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.