Immortality would be a desirable thing

"Existence is always preferred to non existence, however I feel that among humans it is simply longer existence is preferred, not permanent existence." - my original statementIf the Pro would listen to my points rather than cutting them blatantly short then his argument of my concession might be valid. 1) " However with this one, its essentially impossible to relate to the actual resolution (specifying only an individual) so we cant consider it"Oh it certainly applies. What if you were granted immortality while living in grinding poverty? If you became immortal but you were living in the poorest conditions imaginable then that would be a fate worse than death. It would be nice to be immortal if you were filthy rich living in luxury, however most of us live in the middle class constantly worrying about whether or not we can pay the next bills, and some of us live in sheer poverty where the only hope of escaping such conditions is death itself. Immortality would be very undesirable if until the heat of the universe killed you you constantly had to pay bills and taxes your whole life just trying to make ends meet....2) DiseasesIm sure that in the future society will develop cures for future diseases, however part of my argument was what if you already HAD the disease and then became immortal, only to be forever handicapped by the disease you had beforehand. The resolution states that the person who is immortal cannot suffer from any FATAL disease, so diseases that cause vomiting, dizziness, severely painful headaches, maybe hallucinations, what if you were schizophrenic or mentally insane and you were immortal. You would end up spending your life strapped up in a mental hospital, forever. " If a super disease comes and wipes out all humans, the immortal individual would be the only one to carry on humanity which he has a moral obligation to do (Con conceded to this)."Yeah but you still would be the last human on Earth, and could you imagine how miserable it would be to live for quadrillions of years as the only human left, the Pro seems to not address this. 3) " I'm not going to watch a video arguing Con's position for him, so anything he claims comes from the video should be ignored."Ignoring my arguments doesnt make them go away.... If there were to be a catastrophe where a large object, whether it be an asteroid or a Saturn-sized planet of rock that struck the Earth the results of such a collision would be the end of all life as we know it, that is all forms of life minus the one individual person. What if you had to live on Earth all alone as the last of your kind but now everything is just smoldering ash, omnipotence wouldnt get over that...Ill introduce a new point here that will surely show how individual immortality would be bad.Family. Imagine marrying someone, having children with them, watching them grow up, but then have to sit by and watch each and every last one of them die while you could not help them or grant them immortality. How depressing would that be? first your parents then your wife then your children then your next wife then your other children, followed by your grandchildren, their grandchildren. The emotional toll on any individual who until the end of time must always watch their own family and friends die out over and over is unimaginable and would eliminate any kick out of being immortal.As for the Pro's final arguments:Moral Obligations: I concede that it is important for people to pass down the legacy their forefathers left onto the next generation. However watching that generation, along with the next one, the one after that, etc. constantly die out then the emotional toll it would take on you would be insurmountableOmnipotence: Space probably does have a near infinite amount of resources, but the problem is that space is so vast that humans may never be able to have access to those resources so only if the all the universe was available to human colonization (which if its even possible sure as hell wont come about for a long time) then the true number of resources available for humans to use is considerably smaller that the Pro hopes...life is intrinsically good: "he has not shown death to be an intrinsic good"Death can be naturally good in a number of ways. 1) that person no longer consumes resources allowing for another to do so. If people didnt die competition for resources would be so vast that no one would be able to enjoy life as we do right now. 2) death is the number one way to be alleviated of all your problems and sufferings, there is no other single thing that can lift the burden of suffering, poverty, horrible memories, etc. from so many people than death. 3) legacy, when people die their living relatives usually give a Eulogy to your other close ones so that you can see what all you have done in your life and how you have affected those you love. list of other reasons why immortality would be undesirable:1) Nations never last forever, living to see the day your home nation imploded would be damaging2) Forced into battle, if the government figured out you could never die they might force you into the military3) Experimentation, if scientists devoted their entire careers to studying samples of you. Imagine being a lab rat forever.4) Human Rights, If a particularly corrupt government got a hold of you they could argue that since your immortal and cant die you cant be human, and then you could become a lab rat forever but be subjected to torture5) Taxes, If you never age and become immortal at a young age, you would have to pay taxes forever. 6) Retirement, you would never be able to retire since you can never harness enough wealth to live off of forever7) Unable to age, if you were stuck aging at 8 years old then nobody would take advice from you for your entire life. 8) Death of celebrities, those you look up to always die and you always live through their deaths. 9) Evolution? What if humanity evolved over time to become smarter and more beautiful while you were constantly stuck with the parts of your body you would consider unattractive10) Ugly, this kind of falls under evolution, but if you were horribly ugly and you had to live forever with everyone else judging you that wouldnt exactly be considered as "desirable"11) Style, imagine if just to fit in you had to go with every fad that society clings to for the rest of your life, that would take the zing out of immortality knowing you would always be playing catch-up to blend in. 12) Loss of memories, time causes all things to fade, what if you lived so long you began losing all of the memories you treasured because of the sheer number of all the new ones being made.