“You added “mostly”
And again yes Rishonim argue on Rashi that is irrelevant .
Rashi writes in parshas bereishis that he will write his commentary following this principle: וַאֲנִי לֹא בָאתִי אֶלָּא לִפְשׁוּטוֹ שֶׁל מִקְרָא וּלְאַגָּדָה הַמְיַשֶּׁבֶת דִּבְרֵי הַמִּקְרָא דָבָר דָּבוּר עַל אֳפַנָּיו. At the end of the day, most of the time he followed the second method though anyone familiar with Rashi knows he sometimes does discuss פְשׁוּטוֹ שֶׁל מִקְרָא. That is why I wrote mostly.
“The argument goes that we’ve accepted Rashi as pshat”
So if that is true, then other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied?
“NOBODY said all explanations other than Rashi should be “ripped out”
Did you read the kol korei?? the argument that is repeated over is that the commentary constantly brings down peirushim which are against rashi and chazal.