“Religious ideas, supposedly private matters between man and god, are in practice always political ideas.”

Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes (1984)

It – How Churches and Leaders Can Get It and Keep It (2008, Zondervan)

Address to the Central Legislative Assembly (7 February 1935)

The Spiral Staircase: My Climb Out of Darkness (2004)
Context: The one and only test of a valid religious idea, doctrinal statement, spiritual experience, or devotional practice was that it must lead directly to practical compassion. If your understanding of the divine made you kinder, more empathetic, and impelled you to express this sympathy in concrete acts of loving-kindness, this was good theology. But if your notion of God made you unkind, belligerent, cruel, or self-righteous, or if it led you to kill in God's name, it was bad theology. Compassion was the litmus test for the prophets of Israel, for the rabbis of the Talmud, for Jesus, for Paul, and for Muhammad, not to mention Confucius, Lao-tsu, the Buddha, or the sages of the Upanishads.

: The Foundations of Liberal Policy § 10. The Argument of Fascism https://mises.org/liberal/ch1sec10.asp,Ch.1
Liberalism (1927)
Context: Now it cannot be denied that the only way one can offer effective resistance to violent assaults is by violence. Against the weapons of the Bolsheviks, weapons must be used in reprisal, and it would be a mistake to display weakness before murderers. No liberal has ever called this into question. What distinguishes liberal from Fascist political tactics is not a difference of opinion in regard to the necessity of using armed force to resist armed attackers, but a difference in the fundamental estimation of the role of violence in a struggle for power. The great danger threatening domestic policy from the side of Fascism lies in its complete faith in the decisive power of violence. In order to assure success, one must be imbued with the will to victory and always proceed violently. This is its highest principle. What happens, however, when one's opponent, similarly animated by the will to be victorious, acts just as violently? The result must be a battle, a civil war. The ultimate victor to emerge from such conflicts will be the faction strongest in number. In the long run, a minority — even if it is composed of the most capable and energetic — cannot succeed in resisting the majority. The decisive question, therefore, always remains: How does one obtain a majority for one's own party? This, however, is a purely intellectual matter. It is a victory that can be won only with the weapons of the intellect, never by force. The suppression of all opposition by sheer violence is a most unsuitable way to win adherents to one's cause. Resort to naked force — that is, without justification in terms of intellectual arguments accepted by public opinion — merely gains new friends for those whom one is thereby trying to combat. In a battle between force and an idea, the latter always prevails.

Quoted in Reader's Digest, (February 1963) http://books.google.com/books?id=K3c6AQAAIAAJ&q=%22Man+is+always+ready+to+die+for+an+idea+provided+that+idea+is+not+quite+clear+to+him%22&pg=PA37#v=onepage
Quote s

Source: Speech http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1848/jun/05/expulsion-of-the-british-ambassador-from in the House of Commons (5 June 1848).

The Function of the Little Magazine
The Liberal Imagination (1950)

Sheldon Wolin, “Max Weber: Legitimation, Method, and the Politics of Theory,” Political Theory (1981)