Happy Valentine's Day

February 14, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Reporter Rebecca Berfanger wrote this blog post.

Starting in 2007, each year the clerk’s office in Marion County does a “Chapel of Love” event where couples can get married on Valentine’s Day for a donation to the American Heart Association. This year the clerk’s office had 35 couples scheduled to get married today between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., according to a release the office sent Friday.

A $50 donation to the American Heart Association is in lieu of an officiant’s fee. Since 2007, the event has raised more than $5,500 and 134 couples have been married prior to today’s event.

A year ago today, my friend Natasha Wheeler, who got engaged the previous October, got married at the Marion County Clerk’s Office and has no regrets.

Natasha and her husband first learned about this event through an article they saw in NUVO, and later through the blog post I wrote the Friday before the 2010 event, which I posted on my Facebook page.

She sent me a text that Friday evening because she had called the clerk’s office and was told they didn’t have any openings. I don’t have an “in” with the clerk’s office myself, but I did tell her when I called for more info earlier that day I was told they might be able to take walk-ins.

They got to the City County Building Feb. 14, 2010, about an hour and a half before the scheduled start time for the event, begged for a marriage license (the clerk’s office recommends couples get these ahead of time but did grant one to my friends), and they were the first couple to be married.

About a month later, they hosted an open house at their condo and shared photos and their story from that day. An e-mail I sent to her about the press release for the event was included in their wedding album.

Since then, Natasha and I have talked about her experience. Last month I joked with my coworkers that my boyfriend and I would do this today (we’re not, for the record and in case my mom is reading this).

Before deciding to do this, Natasha and her husband had looked into more traditional options for their wedding, and had even researched the costs for Las Vegas wedding, but they are happy with their choice to get married at the “Chapel of Love.”

“When planning a traditional wedding became too stressful and expensive, we decided to do something more fun, unique and philanthropic,” she texted me on her one-year anniversary.

In related news, the cost of a marriage license might increase if a bill passes this session. HB 1248, currently in the Committee on Family, Children and Human Affairs, would increase the fee from $18 to $72, effective July 1, 2011. Couples who take a premarital preparation course would still only pay $18.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT