I call BS right there.
How can you possibly call that unknowing fornication? The black words on the white page in my text make it very clear that Judah believed he was lying with a prostitute. The price (a young goat) was agreed before the act took place. When he went back to look for her he was clearly looking for not only a prostitute, but a "shrine prostitute", possibly a "temple prostitute" in your translation.
The only thing in doubt was her identity and relationship to him.
Unkowning incest then. Your “point” is still pointless. Judah’s act was not endorsed by God, simply because Jesus was among his progeny, any more than David’s act of adultery was endorsed by God because Jesus was a son of David. You’re going to have to work very hard to turn fornication into a biblical virtue. Now, as Wood says, let’s get back to the thread.