That a movement like Mars Hill could gain enough political clout to remake society in its own image scares me. But, for a couple reasons, I wonder whether this movement will still be thriving in another decade.

One reason for doubt is practical. The young men of Mars Hill have given themselves the task of becoming sole breadwinners for huge families. Four or five decades ago, a man could pull that off, but the cost of living is higher now, and many couples agree that nothing threatens marital bliss like money woes. In between tending to toddlers and stretching a pound of hamburger to feed another mouth, Mama might start to resent the fact that, while Papa didn't have to cede a single song from his iPod, she had to give up every whiff of modernity since 1920. Many women who stay in these marriages might do so only with an understanding: "With so many mouths to feed, we both have to bring home paychecks." And as many experienced couples know, the wife facing the pressure of outside employment doesn't bode well for the biblical interpretation of male headship and female acquiescence.

The other reason for doubt is spiritual. Journalist and essayist Richard Rogriguez recently remarked, "I don't understand these super churches that talk about Christ as a winner. Christ was a loser in this world." If Mars Hill really is about overtaking the voting public and slapping the nonbelievers into shape, the community's deepest thinkers might face a crisis of faith. Of course, that assumes Mars Hill has a lot of deep thinkers in the first place.

The day after the 2004 election, a friend of mine told me that (1) she was an evangelical Christian, and (2) the thought of Bush Junior in office for four more years made her nauseous. Clearly not all evangelical Christians are the same, but unfortunately, a big block of them have consistently equated the GOP with God.

It would be easy to sympathize with the evangelicals who voted Republican for the past six years if the GOP had strung them along with promises like, "We're going to feed the hungry, house the homeless, heal the sick, end social inequality, take care of the planet because it's the only home we've got, and even respect the rights of people we suspect to be our enemies." But that's not how the GOP won the arch-conservative Christian vote.

The GOP-evangelical agenda was about elbowing science out of public-school science classrooms, outlawing abortion while withdrawing a safety net that would let poor parents take better care of their kids, and sniffing around the bedrooms of consenting adults--all the while keeping inquisitive noses out of corporate boardrooms. And it was about a bloody, needless crusade in an oil-rich Muslim nation. Bush Junior and his cronies seduced millions of evangelicals by appealing to their worst impulses. The only question remaining is: Will conservative Christians do a little soul searching and learn something from all this, or simply call themselves victims again?