Obligation? No, not as such. And falling victim to those ideas is hugely dangerous. The idea that we are not or should not be our own masters, that we should dedicate ourselves to service to our communities and so forth is an entrancing idea, but it is mistaken. Wanting to give back to your community is good, and noble, but being obligated to do so is a recipe for tragedy.

In the end it comes around to the same old thing: the institutionalization of morality. Which inevitably leads to obligatory orthodoxy. It's important that people have differing opinions in society, even down to ideas on morality. It's also important, so we have learned, that the strict obligation of society be limited to just those things which are strictly necessary to enable society to operate.

There was a time not long ago when being a member of a specific state religion was mandatory, and enforced. It was a time of oppression and orthodoxy where free-thinking and individual liberty were limited, and progress was stunted. There have been more recent times where similar institutionalized, obligatory morality has gained traction (under various ideological banners) and those too were times of oppression, orthodoxy, suffering, and stunted progress. It doesn't work. Obligation-to-society is merely the first brick to be used to pave the road of good intentions that leads from individual liberty to rule and oppression.

Societies were individuals express their feelings of community spirit and care through spontaneous and personal gifts of time, money, and effort are healthy. Societies where a moral obligation to society is strictly enforced are regressive and tragic.