When discussing the morality of immortality the basic requirement is that there is a choice. Theoretically this is true both at the level of the individual and society. However, society has tended just to assume that all ‘progress’ is true progress and therefore not to be tampered with. If earthly immortality would be within reach, how could we possibly not grab it? Ultra-liberalism might suggest that it is immoral even to discuss the morality of immortality. Everybody should make his or her own choice. However, this is wrong. All exercise of freedom influences the freedom of others. Balancing is required. A society of immortals would not only mean that there would be no future generations, but would also mean that those who like to live in our current society, with a value system informed also by death, would be deprived of that possibility. So choices will be required by society first, and then, if society chooses the immortality route, the individual must choose whether to avail her- or himself of the possibility.