Which is simply a continuation of your fallacious analogy, for unlike you, my argument is not about what i perceive, but how the words and actions of the "hyper veneration" of Mary, as described and substantiated, compares with Scripture, and thus is worship or blasphemous, while constant abundant praise, adulation and devotion to the wholly inspired word of God is Scriptural. Which leaves you resorting to argue that in your perception saying that by reading the Bible one can know about God (or if one says God is in the Bible) then that means he believes the Bible is literally God, and that praying while clutching the word of God and in that your absurd perception this means he is praying to the Bible(!).
You can attempt to argue that worship can only be defined is one knows the heart of the one engaging in such words and actions that Scripture describes as worship, but that does not refute what i said that said Marian devotion would be considered worship in Scripture, while restricting the definition to the heart means that one could even take the mark of the beast and then claim they were not engaging in worship.
If i argued that saying Christ is found in Mary meant that she is God, or that praying while clutching a statue of her necessarily means one is praying to her, or that merely praying while kneeling before a a statue of her necessarily meant one was worshiping her (though that itself is not Scriptural), then your attempted analogy would have merit, but instead your argument by perception remains absurd.