I just want to use Bitcoin as a currency. I honestly do not care too much about the small differences between the two chains. They both have SegWit which will allow the Lightning Network which will allow for fast, cheap microtransactions.
Not really. BCH doesn't have Segwit, doesn't fix tx malleability and obviously LN can't play with tx malleability without other workarounds (?). It's just "bigger blocks".
That "just" is pretty important.
Bitcoin is going to ~4mb per block (indirect max capacity since the data are stored in a 1+3 manner) once Segwit activates, plus LN on top of that. It's not like 8 vs 1. It's 8 vs 4(+LN).
Ethereum was made after BTC. It has fast blocks (issued in seconds). Their devs know about scaling issues, etc etc, yet their network is literally stuck when an ICO happens. Exchanges are shutting down ETH transactions (!) due to load. What's their proposed solution? Bigger blocks? No, they have accumulated too much bloat and it didn't even solve anything, so LN-type extensions it is ("Plasma") to help with computational and storage scaling.
...
Incredibly high amount of transactions can be committed on this Plasma chain with
minimal data hitting the root blockchain. Any participant can transfer funds to anyone,
including transfers to participants not in the existing set of participants. These transfers
can pay into and withdraw (with some time delay and proofs) funds in the root blockchains
native coin(s)/token(s).
...
http://plasma.io/plasma.pdf