This is a repost of what I wrote on this topic on DT:
I was HORRIFIED by this information about "blood diamonds" from Amnesty International. It made me literally ill. NO DIAMONDS FOR ME - not until there is substantial progress made in the tracing of diamond sources. I would not be able to enjoy the beauty of a stone that potentially came at the cost of a child's LIFE.http://www.amnestyusa.org/amnestynow/diamonds.html
I am one who would torture myself with the thought that what I bought potentially came at the cost of a human being's basic rights (or even life).
I suppose almost anything made, bought or sold, when scrutinzed to the 'Nth degree,' could be of spurious origin, but that is the nature of life. How can we know 'the whole story' about everything? How can we be assured that what we are told is 100% correct. It is too exhausting to investigate every single issue.
To that end, I think we all have to pick and choose our battles (including those of conscience). If I am fairly certain that an activity harms or endangers the well-being of human beings, then I feel I have the moral obligation to abstain from participating in any supportive way in that activity.
If I broaden that stance to include harm to animals, then I have moral dilemmas literally every waking moment of my life. (PM me if you're interested ... this topic could well take all day to even lightly discuss.)
I guess, in the end, it's all about where you draw your line in the sand.
Stepping down from my soapbox now...