We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I am agreed on nearly all counts, except that I think Moissanite is much better at the sparkle and durability than Cubic Zirconia.
In an age before electricity, a stone that would seem to gather all the light in the room and then reflect it back with flashes and sparkle was really a thing to behold, I would imagine.
I'm sure I've pointed out here before that the diamond ring on my wife's hand is the very ring and diamond that my grandfather used to propose to my grandmother in the early 1920's. It's even stated in the article that the use of diamonds in engagement rings had been ebbing and flowing for years before the cartel decided to start that campaign.
My mother had a blue zircon, flanked by two baby diamonds, as her engagement ring. Eldest granddaughter now wears it. My engagement ring was a white sapphire flanked by two baby diamonds (actually a birthstone ring as I had the misfortune to be born in April), which I love. Have a daughter who's prospective fiance, faced with financial realities and a woman who was seriously realistic about same, produced a lovely blue sapphire. It's not always about diamonds. Do remember, back in the day, that pointed out I wanted a ROCK, not a few small diamonds smothered in white gold. I got my rock, and my man.