We have pretty much NO mention of Mary's parents in the Bible in anywhere near the fashion of John's parents.... NOTHING.
Dude, that’s just not the case. You seriously need to reread your Gospels, and I mean this in a loving way, because I think you’re an awesome guy with great moral values. Matthew 2 is all about Mary and Joseph and the Nativity. Only Luke 1 goes into detail on the Nativity of John the Baptist, and it also goes into detail on the Nativity of our Lord; the Virgin Mary, who was related to Elizabeth, visits her, and that is where she sings the canticle known as the Magnificat (Zecariah sings the Benedicite, and Symeon sings the Nunc Dimitis, three of the most beautiful hymns in Christianity, all in the opening part of Luke). But the Nativity of our Lord is the theme in both Matthew and Luke, whereas only Luke mentions the Nativity of John the Baptist.
Also, while John the Baptist was special in terms of his nativity, owing to the age of his father, Jesus was more special, because Mary conceived without losing her virginity, and Joseph is not the Father of our Lord but rather his guardian. The Heavenly Father of our Lord Jesus Christ does receive considerable attention in the scriptures.
It doesn’t bother me if you feel that we should pray only to God, as many Protestants are of that opinion, but I am troubled by the fact that you claimed something about the Gospels which is completely inaccurate.
Yes, it is true that some Roman Catholics take Marian devotions way too far and worship her, in violation of the Second Commandment. There is a cult called the Palmerian Catholic Church which has revived the Collyridian heresy and claims the Virgin Mary is present in the Eucharist. And there are some Roman Catholics who want her declared Co-Redemptrix based on the visions of Ida Peerdeman, which the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith when it was run by the future Pope Benedict XVI determined were “not worthy of belief.” The apparitions at Medjugorje were also certainly false, the experience of teenagers who admitted to smoking marijuana, which the local Franciscans exploited in their century-long power struggle (now, one and a half centuries long) with the Diocese of Mostar to avoid ceding control of parishes to the diocese, which they were supposed to have completed by the late 1890s, as Herzegovina had ceased to be part of the Ottoman Empire and had become part of Austria-Hungary, and as such, was no longer under the purview of the Congregatio Propaganda Fide, to be served by mendicant friars who had been given charge of the area as a province, but was rather divided into normal dioceses, but for some reason, the Friars in Mostar have been contumant and have dug in, and the Medjugorje vision gave them an excuse to retain control of the parish church of St. James. And a film was made starring Martin Sheen villainizing the Bishop of Mostar. So please, by all means, oppose this kind of false worship of the Virgin Mary. And if you personally are uncomfortable with the Hail Mary prayer, as a Protestant, I can’t object to that.
But please do not depart from the doctrine of Jan Hus, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, Philip Melanchthon, and John Wesley, by deprecating the role of the Virgin Mary in the birth of Christ, which is unique and special, and which was prophesized by Isaiah, and which does receive about twice as much direct coverage in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Additionally, the Gospel of John features the Virgin Mary in several sections. And the Council of Ephesus and the Council of Chalcedon did reject Nestorianism and the idea that Mary gave birth to Jesus Christ but not God, because John 1:1-17 clearly shows the two are one person, and other scriptures show that the humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ is united without change, confusion or separation, and Martin Luther and most of the reformers believed in the principle of Communicatio Idiomatum, wherein what one can say about the deity of Christ applies to His humanity and vice versa, because in Him God and man were united, which is why we call His birth and life the Incarnation. And by the way, the Reformers I mentioned did also believe in the perpetual Virginity of Christ. As I see it, if we aren’t going to adhere to the very careful and deliberate reconstruction of the Apostolic faith they strove to implement, so that what had happened to the Western Church since the Great Schism of 1054, indeed, since two or three centuries before the Great Schism, would not be repeated, we become like the proverbial house built on sand, without a foundation, because we become disconnected with the early Church; we still have a Bible, but we can’t explain how it came to contain the books that it has, and we have no reason to even adhere to its canon or the Nicene Creed. At that point, we might as well incorporate whatever ancient apocryphal books we want.
But, even if one takes such an extreme approach, there is still the matter of sola scriptura reckoning, and you did make an error, and a substantial one, regarding the Virgin Mary. And I feel like you, being a virtuous Christian, were blinded by the neo-Collyridianism advocated by a minority of Roman Catholics, and this may have driven you to a point where you forgot about or misread the Gospels, and you are making the mistake of falling into the trap of Antidicomarianism, when the correct answer is to recognize Mary as someone blessed by God the Father, having been chosen to bear His only begotten son, conceived supernaturally and without coitus by the action of the Holy Spirit, and to be a mother to Him, while not worshipping her as a goddess.