So I have thought of making a story that will approach the concept of living forever from a different perspective. It will focus on all the problems associated with it, like the loss of reproduction, childhood, growing up, the emotional importance of witnessing death, the halt of new creative minds into the world cultural and educational pool, etc. And I decided to approach it like this... Eternal life started off by being given to only the most important people with a new drug. And it follows an astronaut (let's call him Harvey to avoid confusion), who received the drug because he was chosen, but his family wasn't, so he had to watch all of his loved ones go before him. And for this he is fairly bitter. As the drug becomes more prominent, it is eventually distributed to everyone currently alive, along with the removal of their fertility. Now, in the rare cases where someone may die due to accidental causes, they are "replaced" in a factory-like building that houses embryo's and rapidly grows them in order to keep the population at an exact level. This is the case for Harvey's mission partner (Luther). He died during a mission, and is replaced by another grown person. Harvey grew up the natural way and understands the concepts of the normal way of life (and therefore hates this world of eternal life), and Luther knows nothing other than living forever, so they clash. But eventually, Luther's wife begins to die due to medical reasons, something that hasn't happen since the time of the early stages of the drug (thousands of years ago). So the two start to form a similar bond, and begin a mission to fix, or destroy this "perfect world", that they realize actually isn't so perfect. Now the question that I am looking for opinions on is this...do I make Harvey and Luther characters our for blood of the establishment? Or do I make them simply people trying to get help to save Luther's wife, in a time where the loss of a life seems thousands of times more devastating and heartbreaking? Any opinions are appreciated.