If you can't win an argument on the merits of your position, win it on grammar.

"I am an innocent bystander" Jared said. "I'm just cooking the chicken. You bought it."

"You're supporting the inhumane treatment of chickens just as much as I am," I argued. I had bought the cheapest chicken available at Winco the day before, and I almost felt guilty, since in order to produce them for so cheap, the chickens surely must be mistreated and abused at some mass chicken-plant somewhere. I had admitted as much to Jared, saying we were supporting the industry, which started the discussion.

I continued... "I merely bought chickens that were already killed. It's not like I'm the one who abused them. Someone else would have bought these chickens if I hadn't."

"Well, I'm just preventing waste," he responded. "If I didn't cook these poor dead chickens, no one would, since you already bought them. It is true that if you hadn't bought them, someone else still might have bought these very chicken breasts. BUT, since you did buy them, more chickens have to be abused and killed to fill the demand, since you supported the cheap, abusive, chicken trade. If you hadn't bought these chickens, less chickens would have...."

"fewer chickens" I humphed. pause....

Jared rolled his eyes, "well, you can say 'less' chickens or 'fewer' chickens, but either way..."

"No you can't say 'less chickens,' that's grammaticlly incorrect! You can only say 'fewer chickens' since the chickens are quantifiable. Now, if you wanted to say 'less chickEN' then that's fine, but inasmuch as you're talking about multiple chickens, and you can count them, it's 'fewer'"

ha. take that, Jared.

I win now, right?