You are saying that situation 1 and situation 2 are clearly similar and that this should be the point of our discussion.. for me to supposedly need to defend why situation 2 is different from situation 1. I think that it is illogical and silly for me to have to argue with some silly notion that these two situations are the same, when clearly, they are NOT the same - even though both situations make you feel the same way.. robbed.
I think the only possible germane difference is the party demanding the funds.
A community acting to get you to pay your fair share contribution into the community is NOT the same as someone taking money from you
The critical terms here are "community" and "fair share". If I can't opt out, it's not a community, its a gang. Also, "fair share" is very much up for debate. If the "community" decides that a "fair share" is 100%, are you cool with that?