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".
Didn't BCH fork off after the Segwit lock in? Or did they fork with a version that did not include it?
Would make sense as Wu would not want to expose his AsicBoost usage once SegWit gets activated. Much easier to just create a whole separate chain where he can continue to use it to mine blocks at an advantage.
BCH hard fork happened after bip 91 locked in, but before segwit lock in. Bip 91 forced segwit lock-in because enforcing nodes started rejecting blocks that did not signal segwit. Bip 91 locking in and the desire to avoid segwit provided much if the impetus for going ahead with the hard fork rather than continuing to fight for consensus. Segwit was only signaling at 40% until bip 91 locked in. Bip 91 gained support following the segwit2x agreement. However, unsurprisingly there is now contention about the 2x part.