Only if you're using a web server that's prepackaged by the distro.
Also, what does "third party" really mean in this context? I am neither the author of the Linux distro that I'm using nor the web server that I want to use. It's all third party software from my point of view.
By third party, i mean stuff not in the distro. It's extra effort to install something else. You're likely to have at least a link to docs in your face when you went and got the binaries.
If you're doing your own packaging then presumably you know how to invoke the server by creating a service file for systemd.
The Linux community seems to have a pervasive "if you're doing X then you should be able to Y" kind of attitude. But sometimes you just need to do X, and you know what you know.
SELinux is indeed a PITA. I usually just turn it off.
Your complaint about the community says more about you than about the community. It's certainly not true as a rule.
Back in the day, init ran as root. Init ran services as root, and services were responsible for becoming another user if they didn't need root after binding a port. It was a very simple interface.
Nowadays we have much more complicated interfaces and as a result more flexibility. Init (now systemd) must still run as root, but we can tell the component that executes a service to drop privileges before the service is started. These privileges are also more granular: Root is no longer needed to bind to a low port: We only have to grant the CAP_NET_BIND capability, rather than running as a root user.
On top of this we now have network namespaces and containers, so services might be granted their own interfaces visible only to that service, with specific permissions tailored to only that service.
If you are running a persistent webserver you do not need to worry about whether or not unprivileged users can bind to port 443. The webserver is managed by init and the permissions granted to services are explicit and granular -- and typically all this is configured by the distro by default.