Regular Guy
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Messages
- 5,962
Let's try to hold the right end of the stick...because we do have choices....particularly when purchasing (or not) items like furs, which are fully discretionary in nature.
Do we think there should be any ethical minimum standards applied to the item?
As the current argument goes....if you had thought that the current system of warrantees provided by the Kimberly Process were providing such a minimum standard, many voices, particularly lately championed by Martin Rappaport, would tell you that if you could articulate what your minimun standards were, they would probably be like his.
I actually anticipated this evolution, recently, here: post2683992.html#p2683992 , after Yoram initiated the discussion.
As of the Keynote address from a week ago, given apparently because he was invited to do so, Rappaport addressed the Indian Diamond Industry, the folks who have invested in the most recent set of troubling Zimbabwe diamonds, and told them they might contemplate along with him a Rappaport Minimum Standard, to wit...
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/pres ... 40066.html
"The Rapaport Minimum Standard:
“All diamonds that are legal and not directly involved in severe human rights violations should be freely, fairly and legally traded.”
Note: the phrase “directly involved in severe human rights violations” is defined as diamonds whose physical production involved murder, rape, physical violence or forced servitude.
Rapaport noted that while Kimberley Process (KP) certified Marange diamonds from Zimbabwe are legal in India and many other countries, there was no assurance that they were free of human rights violations."
Do you have any minimum ethical standards for your diamond purchases? If you do, what sorts of questions can you use to determine if you are getting what you want?
Do we think there should be any ethical minimum standards applied to the item?
As the current argument goes....if you had thought that the current system of warrantees provided by the Kimberly Process were providing such a minimum standard, many voices, particularly lately championed by Martin Rappaport, would tell you that if you could articulate what your minimun standards were, they would probably be like his.
I actually anticipated this evolution, recently, here: post2683992.html#p2683992 , after Yoram initiated the discussion.
As of the Keynote address from a week ago, given apparently because he was invited to do so, Rappaport addressed the Indian Diamond Industry, the folks who have invested in the most recent set of troubling Zimbabwe diamonds, and told them they might contemplate along with him a Rappaport Minimum Standard, to wit...
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/pres ... 40066.html
"The Rapaport Minimum Standard:
“All diamonds that are legal and not directly involved in severe human rights violations should be freely, fairly and legally traded.”
Note: the phrase “directly involved in severe human rights violations” is defined as diamonds whose physical production involved murder, rape, physical violence or forced servitude.
Rapaport noted that while Kimberley Process (KP) certified Marange diamonds from Zimbabwe are legal in India and many other countries, there was no assurance that they were free of human rights violations."
Do you have any minimum ethical standards for your diamond purchases? If you do, what sorts of questions can you use to determine if you are getting what you want?