That is what I'm arguing. However, you claim this lens can be lived in a just manner. If prioritizing human interests is a fundamental for anthropocentrism, then where is the justice for other species?
However, if most humans are indeed stuck in an anthropocentric wordview, then, as previously mentioned, aren't there plenty of suffering human beings that are already alive that need tending to? Tomorrow, another 40k people will have died of preventable diseases. This rate far exceeds abortion rates. The pro-lifers, in my opinion, are stuck on the fundamental that human life should be granted freedom to live, and they put fetuses under this idyllic umbrella.
This being said, it is of my opinion that pro-choicers should not focus on their agenda of prioritizing fetuses. Not only do plenty of people not agree with their defining of fetuses as an actual human lifeform worth protecting, but setting limits on abortion should not be a consideration until the rest of the world's issues with human suffering and progress on basic human rights is dealt with.
Oh, and if pro-lifers believe this to be a religious issues, they should be praying to God quite fervently, demanding to know why He chooses to put to death all these unborn children (see: 30% miscarriage rate).