Who cares who gives the invocation at the inaugeration? Someone steps up, says a few words, and is promptly forgotten ten minutes later. Long term real world consequences of decision: zero. Ability to score bonus points with not completely off the wall Christians: possibly worth something (though probably not much.) If Obama can win points with relatively conservative voters by paying lip service to their beliefs and therefore make it slightly easier to pass progressive legislation then--more power to him.

It's also worth taking a moment to consider how the population of pro baseball players may have changed over the years and how that might effect things as well...

Overall the US population is now much larger, and there are also substantial numbers of top notch players coming from other countries--Ichiro for example-- and of course you now have lots of excellent minority athletes who were previously excluded from competition. Of course there are now more teams than there were in 1956 and baseball has increasingly had to compete with football and basketball for top notch athletic talent, but overall, I'd say that MLB can probably recruit from a larger pool of talent now than was possible in 1956, and this likely allows baseball to be more selective-- a player who had just enough stuff to make it into the majors in 1956 might languish in AAA now, while your superstars of 1956 might be a step closer to run of the mill. (In keeping with the 'where are the .400 hitters' theory...)

It's also worth considering that free agency has allowed player's salaries to balloon, and the top players make a lot more money now than their predecessors did--apparently in 1929 Babe Ruth made only about $80k, which is still less than a million dollars adjusted for inflation. The prospect of higher payouts might convince more people to take a roll of the dice on a baseball career now than in times past, further increasing the potential pool of talent and allowing teams to be even more selective.

This, coupled with better conditioning, training--and steroids--is likely to make the average current player better than the average player fifty years ago.

1) You fundamentally do not need to friend this person if you don't want to. You have every right to associate with whomever you please, and to refuse association to those people who make you uncomfortable.

Frankly I doubt the person who is sending you the e-mail strongly cares about your response. In all likelihood (s)he's e-mailing several old high school classmates after looking up his/her class on a whim, and that person's ego will probably recover if a vague acquaintence from the past with whom s/he hasn't had contact in a decade doesn't bother to respond.

However it is polite to respond IMHO. And I doubt you'll be stalked as a consequence. I have friended a few half remembered friends from HS, and generally all that's resulted has been a 'hey how're you doing/what're you up to e-mail' and maybe a couple of happy birthday e-mails. I don't zealously look up facebook friends personal info, and I doubt they're stalking me. Friend the person and if he makes his/her presence known to you in a way to don't like you can toss the person.

And personally... I think it is your problem. You want to reject this person not because of who they are, but because they are from your home town and accepted a life you rejected. Your past, the place you are from, and the possible roads not taken by you seem to unnerve you to a degree that I suspect is unhealthy. The fact that you worry about being judged by such people also strikes me as a sign of some deeper problem. Unfortunately I'm not a shrink so I can't help you, but you might do well to look into it.