Two year ago when Jon and I were talking about getting engaged, he brought up the idea of not getting a diamond engagement ring. As I had at the time bought into the propaganda put out by the wedding industry about the “tradition” and “timelessness” of that magical diamond ring, I felt a bit put off. However, Jon had done some research and found out more about the diamond wars and blood diamonds and together we decided that we did not want to so pointedly support an industry that funded civil war. The Kimberly Process was already in place at this time, so hypothetically we could have avoided buying a blood diamond, but as the Kimberly Process was being monitored by the industry itself it seemed like a bit of a foregone conclusion to think that it would actually to a sufficient job stemming the flow of conflict diamonds into the marketplace. Instead, we decided on a sapphire because blue is my favorite color.
True to our worries, a story in the BBC this past weekend reports the increasing concern that the Kimberly Process is not adequately addressing this concerns. If you are thinking about getting engaged, or just buying a diamond for some other reason, I would like to encourage you to consider using a vintage diamond, a different stone, or a diamond alternative to avoid these concerns. I love my sapphire ring and although others are sometimes confused by the lack of diamond on my left ring finger, I feel proud for taking a stand with Jon for our principles.
From BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8116239.stm