
Linsey Davis/Eyewitness News
Indianapolis, Jan. 13 - The Wedding March is practically as traditional as the wedding ceremony itself. But with time tradition can change, or at the very least be challenged.
"Law defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman," explains Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter.
Charlotte and Dawn Egler are all too familiar with that definition. And while Indiana state law can't stop them from being together, as it stands right now, it can deny them certain privileges that they consider to be rights.
"The most important thing is that we have the rights and protections afforded by marriage," says Charlotte.
The Indiana Court of Appeals is currently hearing the Egler's case, among other same-sex couples, challenging Indiana's current definition of marriage.
But soon, the issue may extend far beyond the Statehouse.
Hitting the airwaves and newspaper this week in Indianapolis and 11 other cities nationwide is a new campaign ad against a federal ban on gay marriages, a ban that would require an amendment to the Constitution.
Indiana Republican Mark Brostoff says, "It's only been amended 17 times, and never to deny liberty rather than expand it."
Charlotte says, "My understanding is that our forefathers never intended the constitution to be used in that manner. It was there to protect the people and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Guaranteed access to hospital rooms, Social Security and health benefits are all at stake for gay and lesbian couples.
Within two to four months the appellate court is expected to announce a decision on Indiana's definition of marriage. Both sides say they would appeal that decision.
Comments Terms of Use: We welcome your participation in our community. Please keep your comments civil and on point. You must be at least 13 years of age to post comments. By submitting a comment, you agree to these
Terms of Service
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login or register See all comments |